HC Deb 05 March 1889 vol 333 cc957-62
MR. COBB (Warwick, S.E., Rugby)

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is a fact that Mr. Robert Anderson, of Scotland Yard, in January last, at his private residence in Linden Gardens, handed to a Times witness calling himself Le Caron (who described himself as a military spy, and whose real name was Beach), a number of confidential documents, forming part of a correspondence which had come into Mr. Anderson's possession in his official capacity; whether it is a fact that Mr. Anderson at the same time, voluntarily and unasked, gave Le Caron a letter of introduction to Houston, who was assisting the Solicitor to the Times in obtaining evidence, and said that Houston was a gentleman upon whom Le Caron could rely implicitly, and that Houston had been selected as representing the interests of the prosecution; whether it is a fact that Mr. Anderson at the time he handed the documents to Le Caron said that he had chosen or culled from the correspondence what he thought Le Caron would need in the case; whether it is a fact that the documents were allowed to remain for a considerable time in the custody of Houston at his rooms in Cork Street; whether he was aware that Le Caron swore before the Special Commission to the truth of the facts named in this Question, and, further, that he had never heard Houston's name until it was mentioned to him by Mr. Anderson, and that, in giving the introduction to Houston, he understood Mr. Anderson to mean that Houston was a gentleman whom the Times could trust; whether he has ascertained from Mr. Anderson if Le Caron's evidence is in these respects true; and, if true, what action he will take in the matter; and whether, if Mr. Anderson stated that the evidence was false, the Government will prosecute Le Caron for perjury?

MR. JOHN ELLIS (Nottingham, Rushcliffe)

, had also given notice— To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether, as he has admitted that the handing over by Mr. Robert Anderson of confidential papers in his possession in his official capacity to a man calling himself Le Caron (a witness for the Times newspaper), to be taken away and used by Le Caron, and Houston, was done without the knowledge or authority of the Secretary of State and not by order of the Special Commission, he proposes to take any action with respect to this conduct of a person holding such a position as that of Assistant Commissioner of Police.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. MATTHEWS,) Birmingham, East

I will answer the Question of the hon. Member for Rugby and that of the hon. Member for the Rushcliffe Division (Mr. John Ellis) on the same subject at the same time. I have already, in an answer to the right hon. Member for Derby, stated that Mr. Anderson will be called as a witness before the Special Commission, and he can then be cross examined as to his action in regard to Le Caron and as to the character of the documents he handed to Le Caron. I must decline to anticipate Mr. Anderson's evidence by answers in this House, or to express any opinion as to the truth of Le Caron's evidence while the Commission is still sitting. Nor can I, with respect to Mr. Anderson, add anything to what I stated in the House on March 1.

MR. COBB

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he has ascertained from Mr. Anderson whether Le Caron's evidence is true or false?

MR. MATTHEWS

That is exactly the Question which I must decline to answer.

MR. JOHN ELLIS

My Question does not relate to anything that Le Caron said. I wish to ask whether the right hon. Gentleman, having admitted in the House that these things were done, does not think it necessary to have a special investigation into the matter?

MR. MATTHEWS

I shall wait the result of the examination of Mr. Anderson before the Special Commission before I take any action.

MR. SEXTON

Will the right hon. Gentleman guarantee that Mr. Anderson will be examined before the Commission?

No answer was given to this Question.

MR. J. MORLEY (Newcastle)

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is true that Mr. Andrews, the Governor of Downpatrick Prison, attempted to influence P. W. Nally to give evidence in support of the charges and allegations of the Times; whether an agent of the Times visited Nally in Mill-bank Prison without Nally's invitation and contrary to his wishes; whether the agent of the Times represented himself to the prison authorities as the friend of Nally; and, if not, then on what ground he was admitted; whether the agent of the Times produced a letter, purporting to be written by John W. Nally, the prisoner's brother, recommending the prisoner to accede to the wishes of the agent of the Times; and whether the interview took place in the presence and in the hearing of a warder?

MR. MATTHEWS

Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to put the first paragraph of this Question to the representative of the Irish Government, whom it concerns? As to the last paragraph, I have to say that Nally was visited in Millbank by Mr. Thompson as the representative of Mr. Soames, who made the application for leave to visit. The visit was not in consequence of any invitation by Nally, who expressed no wish one way or another. Mr. Thompson did not represent himself as a friend of Nally's. He was admitted as a representative of Mr. Soames. No letter was produced of the kind specified, or of any kind. The interview took place in the view but not in the hearing of the warder.

MR. J. MORLEY

I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the alleged letter of Nally's brother was produced to the prisoner with a view of inducing him to give certain evidence?

MR. MATTHEWS

I have no information on that point.

SIR W. HARCOURT (Derby)

I should like to know whether it is the practice, under the rule allowing a prisoner to have visitors at stated times, to send in persons under the name of visitors who are the agents of solicitors without a request from the prisoner?

MR. MATTHEWS

I am informed that it is the practice of the Prison Commissioners to allow solicitors who desire to see prisoners on business to pay a visit independently of the visits paid tinder the ordinary prison rules.

SIR W. HARCOURT

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean the solicitor to the prisoner or a hostile solicitor?

MR. MATTHEWS

A solicitor who represents that he desires to see the prisoner on business.

MR. J. MORLEY

Are we to understand that that rule applies where the prisoner himself expresses an objection to receiving visitors, as in this case?

MR. MATTHEWS

I am informed that in this case the prisoner did not express objection to receive the visit.

MR. J. MORLEY

May I ask whether the prisoner did not object to a repetition of the visit?

MR. MATTHEWS

I must ask for notice of that Question. My information is that Nally expressed no wish either one way or the other.

MR. J. MORLEY

I will now put to the Chief Secretary the first paragraph of the Question.

* MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I was on my way to the House when my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary asked me to answer it. I am making inquiry, and I shall be glad to answer when I can.

MR. SEXTON

I desire to ascertain whether Nally had any opportunity of expressing a wish one way or the other? Was he informed of the visit in advance?

MR. MATTHEWS

I have given the House all the information in my possession. If further information is desired, I will make inquiry.

MR. J. F. X. O'BRIEN (Mayo, S.)

Since this agent of the Times was permitted to visit Nally, may I ask why a friend of Nally's was refused permission to visit him, on the ground that he (Nally) had forfeited his right to visits on account of misconduct, though Nally assured me that he had never been once reported during the whole time of his incarceration?

MR. MATTHEWS

Perhaps the hon. Member will put that Question on the Paper.

MR. W. REDMOND (Fermanagh, North)

Are we to understand that any solicitor who states that he has got business with a prisoner will be admitted at once by the Governor to see him?

MR. MATTHEWS

The ordinary practice of the Prison Commissioners is to admit a solicitor, or his representative, who says he has business with a prisoner, to see him.

SIR W. HARCOURT

I think we should understand this clearly. Is it sufficient for any solicitor to present himself at any prison, and state that he desires to see a prisoner on business, to entitle him to admission?

MR. MATTHEWS

He must have first asked for and obtained the permission of the Prison Commissioners.

    cc961-2
  1. PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THE THAMES EMBANKMENT. 544 words