HC Deb 06 February 1900 vol 78 cc721-2
SIR JOSEPH LEESE (Lancashire, Accrington)

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the circumstances under which Mr. Emanuel Williams, a chartered accountant of high standing in Manchester, was on the 19th of September last arrested and kept in prison for five days under a warrant granted, at the instance of the Treasury, by a magistrate of the Bulling-don Division of Oxfordshire, charging him with having written and sent to the Rev. George Moore five letters demanding with menaces certain money and a valuable security; whether the Treasury before giving instructions for a warrant to be applied for caused inquiry to be made as to the circumstances under which the alleged threatening letters were written, or whether they relied merely on the letters; and also whether they caused inquiry to be made as to Mr. Williams's character and position, with a view to ascertaining whether he could be depended upon to answer a summons; whether he is aware that on the hearing of the case the prosecution withdrew two of the letters; that the prosecutor admitted that he saw no threat in the third; and that with regard to the last letter, upon which the prosecution mainly relied, the presiding magistrate in dismissing the charge said it suggested no course which was not strictly reasonable and honourable for anyone to have taken; and further stated that the magistrates regretted very much that Mr. Williams had been put to annoyance and inconvenience, and to the temporary deprivation of his liberty; and whether the Treasury intend to reimburse Mr. Williams the costs he has incurred in defending himself.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir R. WEBSTER,) Isle of Wight

The answer to the first and third paragraphs of my honourable and learned friend's question is in the affirmative. As regards the second, before application was made for a warrant, full inquiries were made. I have most carefully considered the whole of the circumstances of the case, and there is in my opinion no ground for suggesting that the Treasury should reimburse Mr. Williams the costs he has incurred in defending himself.