§ Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he would have Mr. Tom Mann set at liberty, in view of the fact that the Government had not instituted proceedings against those persons who had since printed and distributed the same or similar appeals to soldiers?
§ Mr. McKENNAI would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to him by the Attorney-General on 30th April.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs not the case altered now that Mr. Tom Mann has been sent to prison? Has not the time arrived for the Government to show some change of tactics?
Sir GILBERT PARKERAs it is an offence against the law to print and distribute such pamphlets, why does the Government make a selection for prosecution instead of prosecuting all?
§ Mr. McKENNAI must refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply given by the Attorney-General.
§ Mr. McKENNAThe hon. Gentleman may not like the reply, but it was a reply.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the reply was that the printing and distribution of these papers recently had been trivial? May I hand him a few copies that I have received this week?
§ Sir J. D. REESWill not the right hon. Gentleman prosecute a few more?
§ Sir WILLIAM BYLESIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a widespread feeling of consternation at this sentence, and—
§ Mr. McKENNAThe hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) has a question on the subject lower on the Paper. I would rather answer the question then than have it forestalled by supplementary questions.
MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINEasked the Home Secretary if Mr. Mann, who was sentenced to six months' imprisonment on the 9th instant for his connection with a case of inciting soldiers to disobey their 781 officers, has ever before been convicted of any offence in Britain; and, if so, of what offence and when?
§ Mr. McKENNAI understand that many years ago Mr. Mann was convicted of a comparatively trivial offence which should not in any way be brought up against him at the present time.
MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINEMay I ask if I am wrong in thinking that this is a case of diluting beer in a public-house?
§ Mr. McKENNAI believe it is.
§ Mr. LANSBURYasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that the case against Tom Mann as presented to the Court contained no evidence of any kind that he had personally distributed the Open Letter to British Soldiers amongst any members of the Army or Navy, and that the sole offence for which he was charged was the fact that at a public meeting he expressed himself as in agreement with the letter and also as partly responsible for its publication; and whether, under these circumstances and in order to safeguard the public right to free expression of opinion on matters of public policy, he will advise the immediate release of the prisoner?
§ Mr. McKENNAI have called for a shorthand note of the proceedings in this case, and until I have read it I am not in a position to reply to my hon. Friend's question. I may remind my hon. Friend that the prisoner has a right of appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal on any ground of law, and a right to apply to the Court for leave to appeal on any question of fact or on the question of his sentence.
§ Mr. LANSBURYIn considering this case, will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the statement of the Attorney-General that the initial prosecution was taken only to establish the law on the subject, and that already the prosecution of three persons has established the law on the matter, and that Mr. Tom Mann's arrest is in connection with the same offence as these three men have been sent to prison for?
§ Mr. McKENNAI certainly will consult my right hon. and learned Friend. I have no doubt he will advise me in the matter.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEMay I ask, Mr. Speaker, in view of the reply just given, whether it will be competent to ask for 782 leave on a future occasion to move the Adjournment of the House on this question? No reply has been given to-day, and I want to know whether I may ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House on a subsequent day when a reply is then given which may not be satisfactory?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Gentleman is looking a little too far ahead in asking me to answer that to-day. We must wait and see what the answer is.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODWould it not be in order to move the Adjournment of the House in order to call attention to the serious industrial unrest that this imprisonment may cause?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Gentleman must wait till after Questions.
§ Sir W. BYLESIn looking over the Papers, as he has promised to do, will the right hon. Gentleman look for any sign of moral turpitude, as the Home Office phrase goes, if there be any in this case?