§ SIR CHARLES FORSTERasked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether his attention has been called to the case of W. Sampson Benton, against whom proceedings have been authorised by the Guardians of the Walsall Union, after six previous prosecutions for non-compliance with the Vaccination Act; and, whether he considers such repeated prosecutions to be in accordance with the instructions contained in the letter addressed by the Board to the Guardians of the Evesham Union on the 17th of September lasts?
§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTH,in reply, said, his attention had not been officially called to the case referred to by the hon. Member; but his attention had been recently drawn to cases of a similar character where repeated prosecutions had been instituted by the Guardians for non-compliance with the Vaccination Act. On a former occasion, he had placed on the Table a Letter which he caused to be sent to the Guardians of the Evesham Union last year, and which laid down the policy of the Local Government Board on this subject. It was difficult for him to say, as he had not the exact facts before him, whether the conduct of the Guardians of the Walsall Union was in accordance with the directions of the Board; but under the Act of Parliament it was absolutely necessary that the final discretion in these matters should be left to the Guardians, and it would not be proper for a Government Department to 946 issue authoritative directions as to what the procedure should be. It did seem to him to be unfortunate that repeated prosecutions occurred in so many cases, and the Local Government Board had suggested to the Guardians that after having procured two convictions under the Act, they should consider whether under the circumstances of the case they were likely by repeated prosecutions to ensure the vaccination of the child. If that was likely to be the result, no doubt further proceedings should be taken, but whether the Guardians were justified in the present case depended on the circumstances.