§ 54. Mr. THURTLEasked the Home Secretary if, for the information of the House, he will state the general principles which guide him in determining whether or not compensation shall be 810 paid to a person who has been wrongfully charged by the police?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSEach of these exceptional cases is dealt with on its merits, important considerations being the nature of the damage sustained and the question whether misconduct or negligence on the part of the police has been so clearly established that it would not be reasonable to leave the complainant to seek his remedy in the ordinary way by proceedings in the Courts.
§ Mr. THURTLEWhat does the right hon. Gentleman mean by damage sustained? Does he mean damage sustained to social reputation, or what kind of damage?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI mean by that such damages as persons would be entitled to obtain before a jury.
§ Mr. HARRISIs the sole right to give a decision vested in the Home Secretary, or is it subject to the control of Parliament?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe right is vested in the Secretary of State subject to the overpowering, the overmastering right of Parliament to dismiss him if there is want of confidence.
§ Mr. MORRISIs the test the damages that would be awarded by a jury, and, in view of that test, will the right hon. Gentleman say that the recent amount of £500 is a reasonable amount to be awarded by a jury in a case of that character?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI am quite satisfied in my own mind that the £500 is a very liberal allowance in this par- 811 ticular case. I do not think a jury would have given more. The respondent is quite open to take his case before a jury if he pleases.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAOn what Vote will this sum appear?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe Police Vote.