§ MR. ROWNTREE (Scarborough)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if it is correct that Ambrose Sutton, a member of the Salvation Army, who was sentenced to a fine of 10s. and costs for obstructing the highway, at the Bungay Petty Sessions on the 20th June, or in default to fourteen days' imprisonment, and on whose behalf an appeal was duly lodged, was put to hard abour, and underwent five hours on the treadmill each day, in addition to picking oakum; if, at the time of such imprisonment, Ambrose Sutton was in weak health, suffering from a complaint which caused him to vomit a quantity of blood; and if such punishment was authorized by the sentence inflicted; and, if so, whether inquiry will be made into the fitness of such punishment in view of the prisoner's state of health, and pending his appeal?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI am informed by the Prison Commissioners that Ambrose Sutton was received into custody on the 21st of June under a sentence of 14 days' hard labour. He was accordingly put to hard labour on the tread-wheel for five hours instead of the usual number of six hours for four days. The remainder of each day he was employed on oakum-picking. On the 28th of June an appeal was received at the prison, and the prisoner was forthwith discharged on entering into recognizances. There was no vomiting of blood and no evidence of ill.health beyond complaints of trifling ailments on the 26th and 27th of Juno, on which days he had no hard labour. The punishment was in accordance with the sentence, and under the existing prison rules, provision is made for the cessation and regulation of hard labour under the medical officer's advice.
§ MR. ROWNTREEIs it usual to pass a sentence of hard labour in default of the payment of a fine of 5s?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI can hardly say that it is usual, but it is very common.