§ 26. Mr. WATTasked the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been called to the conviction in Edinburgh Sheriff Court, on 27th February last, of a constable named Sturgeon who was sentenced to fifteen months' imprisonment; whether he is aware that it was on this man's evidence solely that Miss Jessie Brown, of Glasgow, was arrested and convicted of solicitation; and, if so, whether, in view of these new facts, he is now in a position to enforce a solatium from the authorities to that lady?
§ 27. Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that Jessie Brown was convicted of soliciting at Glasgow on the evidence of two 1047 plain-clothes constables; that she thereafter obtained two certificates from doctors that she was virgo intacta; that the authorities refused, on this being brought to their notice, to expunge the conviction or to grant any compensation; and that, on her bringing an action, the Justiciary Appeal Court quashed the conviction; and whether, seeing that the two constables were condemned to pay £40 damages in July last for the illegal arrest of one Duncan Harvey, and that one of these constables, Alexander Sturgeon, was in February convicted of what the presiding sheriff described as a singuarly cold-blooded and brutal bigamy, under these circumstances he will recommend that compensation be paid to Miss Brown for the grievous wrong which has been done her?
Mr. McKINNON WOODThe answer to the first part of the question of my hon. Friend the Member for the College Division of Glasgow is in the affirmative. To the second and third in the negative. The answer to the first and second parts of the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme is in the affirmative. As to the later parts of the question, the magistrates stated that they had no power to expunge the conviction, but on appeal to the High Court the conviction was quashed. Miss Brown brought an action against the two constables for wrongous arrest, but it was dismissed on the ground that she had not brought the action within the statutory period of six months. As to the last part of the question, my predecessor entered into correspondence with the magistrates, who informed him that they had considered the case and decided against giving compensation. Since the case against the two constables, I have also been in correspondence with the magistrates, who have informed me that, after consideration and reconsideration on a number of occasions, they do not see their way to alter their decision.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there has been any doubt thrown upon the doctor's certificates that this lady was virgo intacta; whether that is accepted, and, if accepted, whether they still refuse to give compensation for this extraordinary arrest —an arrest by constables both of whom have since been convicted of crime, the one of wrongful arrest, and the other of bigamy?
Mr. McKINNON WOODAs I have pointed out, the conviction was quashed by the High Court. I do not know that I need go into the grounds upon which the conviction was quashed. But the fact is as stated, that the magistrates have informed me that they do not see their way to grant compensation.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODDo they throw any doubt upon the certificates of the doctor?
§ Lord ROBERT CECILIs there any objection on the part of the right hon. Gentleman stating the grounds upon which the magistrates refused to grant compensation?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI am not in possession of all their reasons. They have informed me that they have again and again considered this matter very carefully, and that they have come to the conclusion which I have stated. It is not a matter over which I have any control. I cannot control the action of the magistrates. They are not called upon to explain their reasons. But they have assured me that they have given the matter their serious consideration.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODWho were the magistrates; how many were there; what are their names?
Mr. McKINNON WOODThere is no appeal on the question of compensation. The lady, I may point out, had her action for damages against the constables concerned, but unfortunately it was not brought till some three or four months after the statutory period had elapsed, and I think the case was dismissed. She had her remedy against the constables for wrongful arrest, but she has no remedy to compel the magistrates to grant compensation. That is a matter entirely in their own power.
§ Mr. BUTCHERHas the right hon. Gentleman asked the magistrates for their reasons?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI have no right to demand the reasons of the Scottish magistrates, nor do I think it would be in the interests of anybody concerned if I were to discuss the correspondence between the magistrates and myself. It is a correspondence over which I have no right of control, therefore it is merely a question of correspondence between the Secretary for Scotland and the magistrates who are dealing with a matter within their competence.
§ Mr. WATTWill the right hon. Gentleman suggest to the magistrates that it is a case where a solatium should be given?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI should like to point out to hon. Members that the lady has had the conviction quashed on appeal, and so far her character has been justified.
§ Mr. JOHN WARDDid you pay her costs?
Mr. McKINNON WOODThe hon. Member is under an entire misapprehension. It has nothing to do with the Government. The lady was not prosecuted by the Procurator-Fiscal, who is under the Lord Advocate. She was prosecuted by the Burgh Procurator-Fiscal. It is purely a case for the Burgh Prosecutor.
§ Mr. PIRIEAre we to understand that there is no power in Scotland analagous to the power of the Home Secretary in England, and, if so, is there any suggested remedy?
§ Mr. SPEAKERAny further questions on this matter had better be put down.