§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYasked whether, upon the issue of the Report of the recent inquiry into the management of the Akbar reformatory school, the various officers who had been examined at such inquiry were awarded a double month's pay, on the condition that they would remain loyal to the superintendent of the school?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI am informed that the managers resolved that, in view of the "train on the officers of the school during the last few months, they should be given one month's extra salary, and that this gratuity has been paid to all the officers with the exception of the superintendent, the chaplain, and one individual who had joined only in January this year. This compensation for the extra work caused by the inquiry, which involved all the staff being kept on the premises for ten days and nights without a break, had nothing to do with the giving of evidence at the inquiry, and it was given unconditionally.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYDoes the right hon. Gentleman simply base his answer on what he is told, or has he taken any step to inquire whether the suggestion in the question is true that the condition of this gratuity was that those people who were witnesses at the recent inquiry should in future be loyal to the authorities of the Akbar school?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI have said the compensation was given unconditionally. I have not been down to Liverpool myself, if that is what the hon. Member means, but I have relied on the usual sources of information.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYasked the Home Secretary whether a shorthand note or other record was taken of the proceedings at the recent inquiry into the management 2004 of the Akbar reformatory school; and, if so, whether he has any objection to lay the same upon the Table of the House?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLA shorthand note of some of the proceedings was taken for the convenience of the inquiry; but as none of the evidence was on oath, I do not propose to publish it.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYasked whether Mr. Robertson, the chief inspector of reformatories, has since the recent inquiry visited the Akbar school and intimated to some of the witnesses that, unless in future they are loyal to the superintendent of the school, they will be dismissed?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe managers having stated that they were contemplating the dismissal of one of the officers on the ground that he was not only disloyal but untruthful, the chief inspector saw them, and asked them to overlook the man's conduct because of the indemnity promised to witnesses at the recent inquiry. To this they agreed; but they have since reported that the officer has been detected in making fraudulent use of the stores, and that he will probably be prosecuted. There is no other case to which the suggestion in the question can refer.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYDoes the right hon. Gentleman know that he is now being prosecuted, and that the case is now before the court?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLIn that case it is still more unsuitable to make the suggestion and then ask the question the hon. Member has asked.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYIt is an instance of the lack of inquiry which is made before official answers are given.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe information which reaches us does not always reach us within a few days of any particular action being taken. I gave the answer in good faith on the information before me.