§ SIR GILBERT PARKER (Gravesend)On behalf of the hon. Member for the Walton Division of Liverpool, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Edalji Committee were informed that notes of the trial had been taken by the deputy chairman, and that the Home Office had thought it worth while to require such notes for inspection; whether such notes contain the most authentic and reliable account of the proceedings which is in existence; and whether in fact they were found useful by the Home Office.
§ MR. GLADSTONESir Arthur Wilson and his colleagues were aware that the deputy chairman's notes has been sent to the Home Office and that they had been returned to him. The notes were of course authentic and reliable: but they were abbreviated and somewhat fragmentary, and though most useful to anyone who had heard the evidence for the purpose of refreshing his memory, were not in my opinion of great use to anyone who had to master the facts of the case for the first time.
§ MR. HARMOOD-BANNERI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what principle compensation has been given in previous instances to persons to whom a free pardon has not been given, whereas in the case of Edalji a free pardon has been given, but compensation has been withheld.
§ MR. GLADSTONEEach case has been considered on its merits. In a few instances small sums have been given by my predecessors by way of compassionate grant where the circumstances of the case did not appear to justify the grant of a free pardon. Such cases have, however, been wholly exceptional and do not establish any principle on which a claim for compensation could be based.