§ MR. KEIR HARDIE (West Ham, S.)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has received the written testimony of six separate and 477 reliable witnesses, and the names of six others prepared to give testimony, all of whom contradict the statement made by the officer who wounded with his sword Arthur Walker on the day of the Royal Wedding; and whether he will now order an independent investigation into all the circumstances of the case? I beg also to ask whether on I he day of the Royal Marriage the officers in charge of the soldiers in the streets had stringent orders to cut down, if necessary, anyone who attempted to break through the lines: whether ball cartridges were served to the soldiers on duty on the same occasion, to be used in a, case of emergency; and whether it is customary on the occasion of a State pageant to arm the soldiers with ball cartridge, and give officers stringent instructions to cut down sightseers who attempt to break through the lines?
§ * MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANI am obliged to the hon. Member for sending me letters from six persons who witnessed the occurrence in the Strand. Their evidence varies somewhat, but I do not think that any inquiry would | were grave enough to justify the hon. bring out more than has been already disclosed. As I have already staled, the officer disclaims any intention to injure the man, the seal wound being practically the result of a regrettable accident. In answer to the further question, I have to say that no orders such as described were given to the officers in charge of troops, that no ball ammunition was issued, and that it is not customary on similar occasions to take such extreme steps.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEDoes the officer adhere to his statement that Walker endeavoured to grasp the reins of the horse and thereby caused the accident?
§ * MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANI would not go so far as to say that this caused the accident to occur; but it was the reason why the officer struck him with his sword. The accident consisted not in the seizing of the rein, but in the sharp edge of the sword meeting the man's bead instead of the flat. With regard to the catching hold of the reins, which, as the hon. Member says, was an important factor in tin; occurrence, even some of the letters—one, at any rate, which is most elaborate in its details—admit that it was quite possible the rein was taken hold of, and suggest it was done, not with a view of stopping 478 the horse but because the man was ed by the crowd between the horse an omnibus—an empty omnibus— and which was standing in the street. One way or other, it is most natural to suppose tint, in the circumstances, the rein was taken hold of; and, if so, the conduct of the officer, so far as that goes, was not unnatural.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEBut does not the writer of that particular letter say he was not in a position to see whether Walker did seize the horse's rein or not, and do not the five writers, all of whom were looking from windows, distinctly state that the rein was not grasped at all, and that Walker was not in a position to seize it hail he endeavoured to do so? Under these circumstances, and despite the levity with which the matter has been treated, I ask, do not these assertions justify, in the interests of the Service and of the public, an independent investigation?
§ * MR CAMPBELL-BANNERMANI quite agree that the circumstances Member in sending me these letters. I am not at all surprised that persons who saw more or less of what occurred should be willing to come forward with their testimony; but I disagree with the hon. Member in his supposition that inquiry would bring out any more than we have ascertained, in the confusion and hurry that prevail on such an occasion it seldom happens that one man sees the whole occurrence; and the conclusion I have formed from the letters I have received is that inquiry would bring out no more certain knowledge of the facts.