Sir. WALTER FOSTER (Derbyshire, Ilkeston)To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the punishments inflicted on children who are withdrawn from public supervision and protection in Poor Law institutions, such as that inflicted on a boy in the St. Giles' Receiving Home in January last, who was returned to the Westminster Union with both cheeks black, both arms black, and bruises on his legs, or that lately inflicted on a boy in the village community of the Wolverhampton Guardians, the Department 888 will issue such regulations as will prevent excessive corporal punishment in the future by requiring; the resignation of any officers guilty of such practices.
(Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The regulations in force in respect of workhouses contain rules which are intended to prevent excessive corporal punishment. They prohibit corporal punishment altogether in the case of a girl, and, in the case of a boy, direct that the rod or other instrument shall be approved by the guardians or visiting committee. Two officers must, if possible, be present when the punishment is given, and it is not to be inflicted until two hours have elapsed after the commission of the offence. The particulars of the punishment are required to be entered in a book which has to be laid before the guardians. Similar rules are contained in the special orders issued for Poor Law schools and like institutions. Any officer infringing the rules or administering excessive corporal liable to censure office, as the case rules are, I think, punishment is or removal from may require. The sufficient usually to prevent undue punishment, but where a case of excessive punishment is reported to me I am prepared to deal with any officer in fault in the matter in Such way as in the circumstancs may be necessary. I may add that, as I understand, the bruises, etc., in the first case referred to in the Question are not admitted to have been caused by punishment at all.