§ MR. CHIOZZA MONEY (Paddington, N.)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department why it is considered necessary to suppress the names and addresses of the firms mentioned in the annual factory inspectors' reports as committing offences, in some cases of a gross character, against the Factory Act.
§ MR. GLADSTONEIt is the practice of the Department, and I think it will be felt to be a proper one, that the published reports of the inspectors should not as a
† See (4) Debates, clxx., 970.332 general rule reflect upon individual firms by name. Where an offence results in proceedings being taken in the Courts, publicity is given to it in that way; where proceedings are not taken the publication of names might be regarded as penalising employers who had not had an opportunity of presenting a defence to a judicial tribunal. I may add that until 1900 a detailed list of all prosecutions appeared annually in the Chief Inspector's Report; but as the prosecutions number nearly 4,000 a year, and the list occupied nearly 100 pages of print, and was of no special use, its publication was discontinued.