§ Sir ARTHUR GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENasked, in further reference to the case of the young man named Stokes, whose sentence of six months' imprisonment on a charge of stealing certain articles of luggage at Wolverhampton was lately quashed on appeal, whether, in the view of the Home Office, the man is innocent or guilty; if the latter, why was he released from prison; and, if the former, why does the Home Office refuse to give him some compensation from public funds in view of the fact that he was in prison for three weeks, and has lost his employment?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEARTMENT (Mr. McKenna)It is no part of my duty to express 200 any opinion with regard to this man's guilt or innocence. I can only refer the hon. Member to the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal as reported in "The Times" of 31st October, and say that no case has been made out to justify an application to the Treasury for a grant of money from public funds.