HC Deb 11 May 1899 vol 71 cc322-3
MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, what is the practice of the military authorities with reference to cases in which a military officer has been convicted of an offence by a civil tribunal; do the military authorities in such a case ever inflict upon an officer who has been thus convicted a second penalty, amounting to a suspension of an officer from military duties during a limited period and allowing him to return to his duties at the expiration of that period; and, is it the practice of the military authorities, when an officer has been convicted of an offence before a civil tribunal, to inflict a further punishment upon him, either by suspending him from his military duties, by calling upon him to resign his commission, or by dismissing him from the Service, without giving the officer himself any intimation that his case is under the consideration of the authorities and without affording him any opportunity of giving any explanation that he may have to offer.

* THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. GEORGE WYNDHAM, Dover)

In the last eight years there have been but five cases of civil conviction against officers in the Regular Army. These officers have been either removed from the Army or called upon to resign, in accordance with the nature of the offence. The rarity of such cases makes it difficult to speak of a practice, but going beyond the period of eight years, two cases are remembered in which officers were removed from the Army immediately after the decision of a Court of Law.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

Has the War Office no practice?

[No reply.]