§ MR. EDWARD JENKINS (for Mr. MUNDELLA)asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If it is true, as stated in the following paragraph from the "Morning Post," that:—
Colonel Baker was in the first instance placed in a different reception cell at Horse-monger Lane Gaol to the other prisoners, and throughout his term of punishment he will be kept separate from them. He is allowed to wear his own clothing, to buy his own food, to furnish his rooms—he has had two allotted to him—with what is reasonable, necessary, and not extravagant; to have wine at his own cost not exceeding one pint, or malt liquor not exceeding one quart, per day. He is not required to do any work, to clean his apartment, make his bed, or perform any menial office, all these being done for him by an officer of the prison. He may have any unobjectionable books or newspapers which he chooses. He may write or receive letters or papers, but these must in the first instance be examined or read by the governor. Lastly, he may see his friends in his apartment between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m.and, if so, who is responsible for maintaining the discipline of the prison; and, whether the same regulations would apply to other criminals convicted of the same offence?
MR. ASSHETON CROSSSir, perhaps I may be allowed to answer the last part of the Question first. By the Gaol Act, 28 & 29 Vict. c. 126, s. 67, in every prison to which the Act applies, prisoners convicted of a misdemeanour, and not sentenced to hard labour, are to be divided into two divisions, one to be called the first division; and whenever any person is convicted of misdemeanour and sentenced to imprisonment without hard labour, it is lawful for the Court or Judge before whom the prisoner is tried to order such prisoner to be treated as a misdemeanant of the first division, and not to be deemed a criminal prisoner within the meaning of the Act. When the learned Judge who tried this case sentenced the prisoner, and made out the warrant of commitment, it was stated in the warrant that he was to be considered as a first-class misdemeanant. He would therefore fall under the first division of misdemeanants who are not sentenced to hard labour; and, that being so, he would come under the ordinary prison rules, which were sanctioned long ago, the effect of which is to place the prisoner in the category of prisoners 858 alluded to in the Question of the hon. Member. The hon. Member will see that it is no question of action either on the part of the Home Office or on that of the visiting justices, but simply a question of law, the prisoner having been so sentenced.