§ MR. HOPWOOD (Lancashire, S. E., Middleton)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the conviction and sentence to a month's imprisonment of a woman named Minnie Daft, and the acquittal of her husband, at Leicester Borough Court, for neglecting their child eight months old; whether he is aware that the main fact relied on was emaciation, which might be caused by other means than want of food, and that it was in evidence that the mother had previously called in two medical practitioners, first a Dr. Lithgow, and later Dr. Clements, to see the child, but that neither was summoned as a witness, though the latter had been interviewed by the Inspector of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, the prosecutors; whether he is aware that the woman was reputed to be industrious and hardworking; and whether he will make inquiries; and if it appears that through the defendant being undefended injustice has been done he will advise the remission of punishment, so that the mother may be restored to her children?
§ MR. ASQUITHMy attention has been called to this case. In regard to the first two paragraphs in the question, both Dr. Shearer and Dr. Barlow proved that emaciation was caused by starvation alone. The child was in a filthy condi- 1143 tion and weighed only seven pounds. Since it has been left in the Children's Shelter and properly fed it has improved daily, and its strength has rapidly increased. The mother did say she had consulted Drs. Lithgow and Clements, but it was so far back as March last. Neither were called as witnesses. No statement as to character was before the Bench. It was, however, proved that the father earned 25s. a week. After careful inquiry into the case I find no ground for the Home Office intervention.