§ MR. BRADLAUGH (Northampton)asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether John Chapman, master gunner, stationed at Ceylon, was, without any Court Martial or Court of Inquiry, dismissed for revealing official secrets; whether any request was made by the General Commanding that John Chapman should be tried by Court Martial; whether this was refused; whether John Chapman denies the charge, and has petitioned for a Court of Inquiry or Court Martial; what answer has been given by the War Office; whether John Chapman has, since his dismissal, received a good conduct medal and deferred pay; and if he can explain how it happened that a man dismissed for disgraceful conduct in revealing official secrets received a good conduct medal; and, whether the name of John Chapman was announced in Regimental Orders, as is usual in the case of recipients of good conduct medals; and, if not, can he explain why it was omitted?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. E. STANHOPE) (Lincolnshire, Horncastle)In this Question there are seven separate items. My answer to the first is, Yes; and to the second, No; which also disposes of the third. As regards the fourth point, Chapman denied the general charge; but admitted that he had, on one occasion, copied and given copies of official papers to one of the parties implicated, though without receiving or expecting any payment. There is no record of his having petitioned for a Court Martial. To the sixth Question the answer is that the cause of Chapman's discharge having been recorded on his discharge certificate as "on account of his services being no longer required" there was no legal power to withhold his deferred pay, or to forfeit his good conduct medal, which had been given him in 1886.