§ MR. W. REDMONDOn behalf of the honourable Member for Cork (Mr. J. F. X. O'BRIEN), I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, being deprived once of the good conduct badge entails the forfeiture for ever of the good conduct medal and the gratuity granted to all deserving men on leaving the service, as well as disqualification from being candidate for the rank of warrant officer; whether Pilkington's hair was cut, contrary to regulations, just as he was going on furlough; and whether he will have Pilkington's badge of good conduct restored to him?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTYThe deprivation once of a good conduct badge does not necessarily entail the consequences suggested in the Question. Pilkington's punishment will not render him ineligible for the award of both good conduct medal and gratuity, provided that he fulfils the conditions laid down in the regulations. With reference to the cutting of hair, the captain awarded, on the quarter-deck, according to the usual procedure, the sentence, which carried with it the cutting of the hair, but before the warrant was read he reduced the sentence to a much milder one, which did not entail this process. In the meanwhile the ship's police, anticipating that the sentence announced would be carried out, as is almost invariably the case, had cut Pilkington's hair. After the warrant was read, the Master-at-Arms, when taking the prisoner away, said, "It is a pity we cut your hair," to which Pilkington replied, "Oh, that won't matter, as it will save my having it cut," or words to that effect. I am further informed that no complaint was 1532 made. The good conduct badge cannot be restored to Pilkington until he has regained it by subsequent six months' service with very good conduct. The reduced sentence was not a harsh one for gross disobedience to an order given.
§ MR. J. DILLON (Mayo, E.)I should like to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether the forfeiture of the good conduct badge carries with it any disability to compete for being a warrant officer, because I have been informed that if a seaman loses at any time the good conduct badge he is disqualified from competing for being a warrant officer?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTYI think the honourable Member is in error, but I will make quite sure in reference to the point.
§ MR. DILLONThis is a vital point, so I shall repeat the Question in a few days.
§ MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN (Kilkenny)Will the right honourable Gentleman inquire whether it is not the fact that in an exactly similar case, to which I called attention in 1892, the good conduct badge was then and there restored to the man?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTYYes, Sir: I think it was, and perhaps it was a pity it was restored on that occasion, because if it had not been we would not have had this case.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTYThese are matters of discipline which, coming before this House, are delicate and difficult matters to deal with, and I hope honourable Members will not press them more than they can help.
§ MR. DILLONWhen the right honourable Gentleman is inquiring with reference to the point I have put to him now, will he also inquire whether it is not the fact that Pilkington has been eight years in Her Majesty's Navy, and that no fault was found with his conduct up to that date?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTYIt was in consequence of his good conduct that the first sentence was reduced.
§ CAPTAIN DONELAN (Cork, E.)Can the right honourable Gentleman say whether the sentence inflicted upon Pilkington in this case still remains recorded against him in the Defaulters' Book?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTYNo, Sir; it would be the milder sentence, and not the sentence first pronounced.
§ MR. J. G. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donegal, S.)A milder sentence of seven days' imprisonment!
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order!