§ 44 and 54. Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Home Secretary (1) whether the report of Dr. Haden Guest as to the state of health of Nellie Hall has been brought to his notice, seeing that that report indicates that she was not in a fit condition to plead her own case and in consequence of the recommendation by the jury to mercy on the ground that those who paid her ought to be in the dock instead of her, whether he will see fit to recommend her discharge; and (2) whether Nellie Hall is still being forcibly fed; whether this has now been going on for six weeks; and whether, now that she is convicted, she will be released under the Prisoners (Temporary Discharge) Act?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. McKenna)I have not seen the report referred to. Miss Nellie Hall was convicted of an offence under the Explosives Act, and sentence was postponed until the hearing of another charge for which she is committed for trial. The prisoner is still refusing her food, and has in the interest of her own life and health to be forcibly fed, but the medical reports show that her general condition is satisfactory, and I am unable to recommend her discharge.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that Nellie Hall had no counsel, and was unable to conduct her own case? Is he also aware that she has been forcibly fed for six weeks?
§ Mr. McKENNAOn the first point, if Miss Nellie Hall had no counsel it was, I presume, in accordance with her own wish.
§ Lord ROBERT CECILWhy? She may not have been able to afford it.
§ Mr. McKENNAIf she were not able to afford it, counsel would have been provided for her, but I believe my hon. Friend will agree with me that it was in accordance with her own wish that she was not represented by counsel. As a matter of fact, her father asked permission to see her in order that he might persuade her to employ professional help, but she refused to do so. As long as Miss Nellie Hall remains a danger to the public I am bound to keep her in prison and alive as long as I can.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that this occurred after she had been convicted under the Cat and 882 Mouse Act, and, in view of the very strong opinion expressed by the Bishop of London, can he not now release her?
§ Mr. McKENNAIf she will give an undertaking not to make use of her liberty under what my hon. Friend calls the Cat and Mouse Act to engage in further attacks on property, I shall be very glad to release her.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODAre all these girls to be kept in prison unless they give an undertaking?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir, the position is exactly the same as it was at the time I introduced this Bill into the House. I then stated that in the case of prisoners whose liberty was a danger to the public I should be compelled to avail myself of the power of forcible feeding as a means of keeping them alive in prison.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIn that case are we to understand that people who merely smash windows will be let out, whilst those harbouring bombs will be kept in?
§ Mr. McKENNAI would not like to define it as in one case smashing windows and in the other harbouring bombs, but those prisoners whose liberty is a danger to the public ought, in my opinion, to be kept in prison.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODDoes not that refer to all criminals?
Captain FABERThe right hon. Gentleman said that counsel was provided for prisoners who had no money. Is it a fact that the provision of counsel is compulsory in all cases where the accused has not sufficient money?
§ Mr. McKENNAI cannot answer that without notice. But as a matter of fact, in this case, the absence of counsel arose solely through Miss Nellie Hall's refusal to have professional aid.
§ Mr. KELLAWAYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that a suffragist newspaper, in reporting this lady's case, referred to her magnificent defence and brilliant cross-examination?
§ Mr. McKENNAI think my hon. Friend has correctly stated that fact.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that I was present in Court, and that the defence was not magnificent, neither was the cross-examination brilliant?
§ 55. Mr. T. M. HEALYasked the Home Secretary whether the Irish girl, Miss Grace Roe, was forcibly fed before conviction; and, if so, whether this treatment had been previously practised on any of the suffrage prisoners; and can he say anything as to her present condition calculated to remove the anxiety of her relatives?
§ Mr. McKENNAThe answer to the first and second question is in the affirmative. Miss Roe has been awaiting trial until today. In the case of prisoners charged with serious offences it is necessary to feed them forcibly if they refuse food in order to ensure their being present to take their trial. I am informed that Miss Roe's condition gives cause for no anxiety.
§ Lord ROBERT CECILHave any of these women ever broken their bail, and will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of not forcibly feeding untried prisoners, so as to give no ground for the allegation that they are rendered unfit to conduct their own defence?
§ Mr. McKENNAI know of no case in which any of these prisoners have broken bail. The question of bail is not for me, but I am fairly confident that if it were offered it would be accepted.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs it not a fact that both Miss Roe and Miss Nellie Hall were refused bail by the magistrates and were thus compelled to remain in prison?
§ Mr. McKENNAI do not know that.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIt was so in the case of Miss Hall.
§ Mr. McKENNAIf the hon. Member says it was so in that case, I can only reply that that is not as I am advised.
§ Mr. T. M. HEALYWas Miss Roe offered the alternative of giving bail or being forcibly fed?
§ Mr. McKENNAI do not think bail was asked for in her case. I may be wrong, but I am only speaking from memory.