§ 21. Mr. W. THORNEasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to an inquest held at Chelmsford Prison, on the 18th April, on the death of a man named Daniel Fayers, who was undergoing a sentence for assault; if he is aware that Dr. Newton, the medical officer, stated that he reported to the Prison Commissioners on the 10th March that the deceased was likely to the before completing his sentence, but received no reply to his communication; will he say if it is usual to grant a remission of sentence to a prisoner whose life is likely to be endangered by further imprisonment; and what steps, if any, were taken upon receipt of the report from the medical officer?
§ Mr. McKENNAI have seen two newspaper reports of the inquest. One of them is incorrect in stating that the medical officer of Chelmsford Prison told the jury that having reported to the Home Office on the case he had received no reply to his report. A reply to the report was in fact sent on the 18th March. When a report is received at the Home Office, as in this ease, to the effect that a prisoner is so ill that he is not likely to survive his sentence, numerous considerations have to be taken into account besides the prisoner's state of health, such as the character of his offence and the possibility of his repeating it, the length of his sentence and the home to which he would be taken or the treatment he would receive if he were discharged from prison. There was nothing to show that Fayers's health was being injured by imprisonment, and having regard to all these considerations, I did not feel justified in authorising his discharge, and the prison authorities were so informed in accordance with the usual practice.