HC Deb 24 March 1914 vol 60 cc336-44
Mr. GULLAND

I beg to move "That this House do now Adjourn."

Mr. PETO

I desire to call the attention of the House to a matter of urgent importance, which is one in which the War Office can do something, and do it at once, and in which something is urgently needed td be done. It has reference to the suicide of Lieutenant and Quartermaster Martin at Devizes Barracks on the 11th of March. The facts that led up to the suicide are these. The lieutenant, who was a quartermaster in the second battalion of his regiment which is now stationed at Gibraltar was recalled home more than four mouths ago. He was ordered to report himself at Knightsbridge, where at the time certain of the defendants in what is known as the care teen scandal case, who have a sort of overflow into the Wellington Barracks, were quartered. He consequently thought from the fact of his being ordered to report himself there that his recall from Gibraltar was in some way connected with the canteen scandal. He was at home for four months: first of all at Knightsbridge for something less than half the period, and then for two months and some weeks he was at Devizes Barracks, and he was kept with no employment whatever during the whole of those four months with no charge formulated against him and nothing told him as to whether he was brought home as a witness or as a defendant. At the inquest, which was held the day after the suicide, one of his fellow officers said, with regard to Martin's condition of mind, that he was in very low spirits and quite upset. His brother a sergeant-major in the 1st Wiltshire Regiment also said that he was not expecting any charge to be made against him, but what worried him was the fact of being brought home for so long while nothing was preferred against him, and having a wife and family at Gibraltar. The Coroner said:— I can quite realise and understand what a terrible, condition of mind he was in. having been recalled is I presume in connection with the canteen scandal, and then having nothing at all to happen for months either in the way of acquitting him of any suspicion or formulating any charge against hint, or even calling hint as a witness. Two points arise on those facts. First, I say that such procedure cannot possibly be defended on the ground of Army discipline, or anything of that kind. It practically amounts to a suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, in the case of this particular quartermaster and others who are now in this country under similar conditions, one at Devizes Barracks, and others to whose case attention was called on the 16th March by the hon. Member for the Isle of Thanet. These men have now been here for many months in the same state of doubt. and uncertainty and mental strain as Quartermaster Martin. In answer to the question which I asked on 18th March, the Secretary of State for War said that this particular officer had not been under arrest. There was nothing in my question to suggest that be lad been under arrest, and I think that the answer given shows the attitude of mind of the War Office in the matter. The right hon. Gentleman seemed to think that as long as the man was not under arrest they were entitled to bring him home under conditions of terrible suspicion and mental anxiety, and to keep him waiting an indefinite period and formulate no charge whatever against him.

I will call the attention of the House to the fact that at first it was intended to proceed by court-martial. A court-martial was constituted, and was subsequently disbanded, the War Office having decided to proceed in the ordinary Civil Courts, and I believe that the magistrate who is hearing the case is only sitting one day a week, and consequently the inquiry will be protracted to an almost indefinite extent. I desire to read to the House the answer of the Secretary of State to a question which was asked by my hon. Friend (Mr. Norman Craig). It is a very long question, and his ingenuity has enabled him to fill a column of the OFFICIAL REPORT, but the important part of the question is at the end:— Why, in these circumstances, the officer named was not included in the prosecution and so afforded an opportunity of defending his good name, but was placed upon retired pay? The answer of the Secretary of State for War was:— Until the present proceedings have been completed and I ant in a position to be advised on the whole matter, it is impossible for me to say who are the persons who are or may be implicated."—[OFFICAL. RRPORT, 16th March, 1914, col. 1685.] From that I conclude that all these officers who are at present in these circumstances are to be kept waiting till the magistrate sits (one day a week) to investigate this long and complicated matter. I really feel that those circumstances—one officer having already taken his life, as was clearly brought out at the inquest, owing to his mental condition, arising from his being kept in this country four months doing nothing, while his wife and children dependent upon him were at Gibraltar—may lead to further disastrous results, unless the War Office see that these proceedings. are carried out with reasonable speed. and that those officers are either accused or acquitted, to join their proper battalions. The second fact I want to bring out—and it has nothing to do with the actual case which is pending—for the consideration of the House is whether there is not a grave responsibility resting upon the War Office in this condition of affairs. I contend that the pay of the quartermasters is wholly inadequate for the great responsibilities that are placed upon them: and the style of living which is necessitated by their promotion to commission rank. I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that we frequently have in the civil courts similar cases to these, and where it is shown in the trials that people in posts of responsibility are paid an utterly inadequate salary in respect of the great duties they have to perform, the judge invariably comments in the most severe manner upon the parsimony of the. employer who is paying inadequate salaries. I say that applies to this case. where the salary is 9s. a day, amounting to £164 a year, which is wholly inadequate considering the responsibilities.

What are the responsibilities that a quartermaster has to take up in the course. of his duties? He is responsible for the ammunition, clothing and equipment of the whole battalion, for the correct receipt and distribution of forage and rations, and he is responsible for barrack equipment in barracks and in camp. He has nothing to-do under the King's Regulations with the canteen proper, but, of course, for his position, his advice is naturally asked, and it is very important that it should be given absolutely independent of any consideration whatever. Not only so, but I am informed—and I do not think it is open to dispute—that in the Guards the quartermaster is also assistant paymaster, and in that capacity he handles something like £500 a week, and for that additional responsibility he is paid by the War Office the magnificent additional salary of £20. That is not all. The pay that he receives is utterly inadequate, considering the social Position he has to assume and that his wife, as it was put to me, is a bridge between the officers' wives and wives of the non- commissioned officers and men on the strength. She has to keep a servant and to keep up certain style. He has to pay for messing expenses and things of that sort, and so utterly inadequate is the provision, that I am informed, quoting the words of one who knows from personal experience, he is appointed to a position that he cannot possibly keep up, and has become a charge on the officers of the unit, which is entirely wrong, because he would not possibly pay his mess bill unless he depended on the generosity of officers in the commissioned rank. Therefore, I say that on that second point the War Office are to blame, for when they raised the pay officers of commissioned rank, on 1st January, there was no addition made to the pay of the quartermasters. Their pay is insufficient for their post, considering their position and responsibilities. The first point I ask the hon. Gentleman to see at once is that reasonable steps are taken to bring this long drawn out inquiry to an end, and that he should not take up the position that was taken up by the Secretary of State for War when he answered me by saying that this man had not been under arrest. I say that the conditions under which these men are kept in this country without accusation, without exoneration, is far worse than the position of arrest. At least the man in the latter case knows where he is, and under the other conditions he does not, and I say that it is simply placing the man in a position where it amounts to nothing less than mental torture, which is being deliberately kept up week after week until the whole thing is settled and threshed out, and until, with slow process of law, the right hon. Gentleman can form an opinion as to who is or is not implicated. I feel bound to raise this question, although I fancy the Secretary of State has other and grave matters for his consideration, and I do so because I wish to shorten this period by every day that I can. I am perfectly certain it is an urgent matter, and that the man should never have been put in the position to take his life under those circumstances, and the War Office is directly responsible for it.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. H. J. Tennant)

The hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Peto) I think realises that the Secretary of State did not know he was going to bring this subject on or he would have been in his place.

Mr. PETO

I sent a message at half-past eleven o'clock to-day reminding him of the fact that we had given five days' notice we were going to mention it.

Mr. TENNANT

I am aware the hon. Gentleman did take that course, but I think the Secretary of State asked whether it would be possible for him to postpone it in view of the other business of the War Office, and we rather thought the hon. Gentleman was going to do that. I am sure the hon. Member will excuse me if I am not able to go into details. I will say this: I feel very sympathetic to the case made out by the hon. Gentleman. It is no doubt a very severe strain on any man to bring him home from a foreign command and keep him for months without informing him what he is to answer for—whether he is to be in the witness-box only, or whether he is to be in the dock. I am sure we should all feel that that was a very great strain. At the same time, if the quartermaster in question was only brought home to give evidence, it seems a great pity that he should not have been told so, and very likely his life would have been saved. It must undoubtedly have been from the fear that he was not going to be only a witness that his mind became deranged. I very much regret the circumstance, and I can assure the hon. Member and the House that., so far as I am concerned, I will make what representations I can, and so far as we can do so we will endeavour to have the inquiry expedited. In point of fact, I am sure the House will realise that the War Office has no control over the Civil Courts. If there be necessity—and I take it that there has been—for this long drawn-out inquiry, I am sure it will be very difficult for us to do anything to alter the minds of those who do control the Courts. However, the hon. Member may rest assured that I will make representations in the proper quarter in order that that matter may be put right. I do not know whether that will be possible or not. In regard to the pay of quartermasters, we realise that a great responsibility is placed upon these officers. They receive higher pay than any other noncommissioned officers—

Mr. PETO

Commissioned!

Mr. TENNANT

They are promoted to be commissioned officers, because they have these extra duties. It is very easy to complain of the pay of officials in various departments of life, but when it comes to finding the money from the taxes it is rather a difficult matter. I am not going to enlarge upon that, but I think that we have done what was possible, and what has not been done for nearly a century in raising the pay of officers.

Mr. PETO

Not the pay of quartermasters.

Mr. TENNANT

I should say that they would have the next claim upon any further money that it might be possible to extract for the purpose of the pay of the Army. I should say, having raised the pay of the officers and not of the quartermasters, that places the quartermasters in the position of having first claim upon any increase that it may be possible to make. It is not easy for us to do all that we would like in the way of granting extra pay to these men. We should like to give larger sums, but it is not possible at present.

Sir HENRY DALZIEL

I think the House will have heard with some surprise the reply of the Under-Secretary. entirely associate myself with the hon. Member opposite. I have had the facts of this case put before me, and I cannot conceive of a satisfactory reply being given on behalf of the War Office in regard to it. The hon. Gentleman has made a very important admission. He has stated that if only this unfortunate man had been told that he was a witness instead of being a victim, shall I say, his life might have been saved.

Mr. TENNANT

That is a surmise.

Sir H. DALZIEL

The War Office is criticised a great deal just now, but I do not think they ought to surmise in a matter of this kind. It is not a question of notice. This matter has been in every paper in the country; it has raised a good deal of sympathy for the unfortunate man. Surely the War Office could send for facts and papers and be prepared to answer Members who might wish to raise the matter. I am not blaming the hon. Gentleman; I am blaming the War Office and the system which allows him to come here without having all the facts and being able to make a definite statement. I say, unhesitatingly, that this man was badly and cruelly treated, and the manner in which he was treated is a disgrace to the War Office and to the Government. I understand there are many of these men concerned. This poor man has gone, and we can do nothing for him. No doubt, the hon. Member sympathises with him—as every hon. Member does—for he is a human man, but what is he doing with regard to the other men? We do not know where we are in regard to this matter. The War Office have brought men from all parts of the world, who have left their families behind them, and they are waiting day by day. The War Office appears simply to be waiting for something to turn up, in the hope that they may get some evidence against these men. It is not business! The hon. Member ought to have been here to-night to say that the War Office expressed their regret that this man was treated as he was, and that there would be an immediate inquiry into the whole matter, so that charges, if there were charges, should be formulated against the men who have been brought to this country. The manner in which the War Office has gone about this matter is a disgrace to the Government and to the War Office. You had your private inquiry, which is not known, even in Russia. You bring up these quartermasters. You hedge them with lawyers. You do not even give them the benefit of a solicitor. You ask them "Yes" or "No," with regard to this subject, and, having got from them all their evidence, you take them to Bow Street and prosecute them! They have not been treated in a worthy way, and the War Office will hear of it in time to come. It is impossible to conceive greater bungling than has taken place in this matter. I ask the hon. Gentleman to-night to inquire into the case of the other men who are waiting at the present time, and who are in the same position as the unfortunate man who has taken his life. Let the inquiry be made at once so that the men may know whether or not there are any charges going to be brought against them, or whether they are simply witnesses waiting about on the chance of being called. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman knows that the case closes in a day or two, and, therefore, he ought to be able to tell them, so far as the police court is concerned, whether they will be required. It is not British justice to keep these men hanging about as they have been, month after month, by the War Office without the War Office being able to formulate any charge against them. I would like to ask the hon. Gentleman to look into this matter at once, and not leave it to Members of this House to bring it home to him, for if there are charges to be formulated, let them be formulated, or let the men go back to their regiments and stations.

Mr. WORTHINGTON EVANS

I agree with what hon. Members before me have said. There are a number of other men whose lives and characters may be saved if the War Office act at once. The War Office have done what they ought not to have done, and have actually refused a Court of Inquiry. One of these men has been brought home from India, and no charge has been formulated against him. He has been kept hanging about for four months, not knowing whether or not a charge was going to be made against him. He has applied for a Court of Inquiry which is his right, and the Army Council or the War Office, for some reason or another, has refused it. Surely it is not right for any man, whether he is a civilian or under military law to be treated in that way. if a civilian were treated in this way there would be a hubbub from every bench in this House, but it happens to be that these men are soldiers under discipline, and they find it difficult, perhaps, to urge their case in the same way that a civilian would. But men who are under regulations are entitled to a Court of Inquiry. It has. been asked for, and has been refused. The hon. Member need be under no difficulty in getting the names of the men concerned—I do not want to mention them here—who have been ordered to report themselves. At any rate, in these cases he ought at once to give them the Court of Inquiry they are asking for, if these proceedings are not likely to be completed for some time, and if he cannot make up his mind as to whether or not he is going to prefer a charge against them or whether he only wants them as witnesses.

Mr. TENNANT

If the hon. Member will give me the names I will make inquiry.

Mr. WORTHINGTON EVANS

I will.

Adjourned at Twenty-nine minutes after Eleven o'clock.