§ 18. Mr. GINNELLasked the Under-Secretary of State for War the names of all the persons convicted by field general court-martial in Dublin last May for complicity in the insurrection in whose cases the convictions were obtained on the evidence of only one witness for the prosecution, and state the sentences in those cases; and whether he is aware that, while in this country a person charged is a competent witness in his own defence, Section 2 of the Defence of the Realm Amendment Act, 1915, expressly deprives persons charged in Ireland of that advantage?
§ Mr. MACPHERSONNo, Sir; I am unable to give the information asked for in the first part of the question. The latter part of the question is perhaps rather for the Law Officers than for me to answer, but I understand that the rules of evidence in Ireland under the Defence of the Realm (Amendment) Act comply with the ordinary rules of evidence in Ireland.
§ Mr. GINNELLWill the hon. Gentleman say why he is not able to give this information, and when and where it may be obtained; also whether convictions and sentences obtained by this process will be reviewed at an early date?
§ Mr. MACPHERSONPerhaps the hon. Gentleman will put the last part of the question to the Attorney-General.
§ 54. Mr. GINNELLasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he will ascertain and state whom Sir John Maxwell consulted last May, if any person, on the legality of trying persons not subject to military law by field general courts-martial, held in camera, in capital cases, and on the legality of having some such persons executed and others sent to penal servitude in pursuance of sentences of such courts; whether he was, or is, aware that this procedure is unprecedented; whether he was, or is, aware that there is no law authorising it; and if he will specify the law on which Sir John Maxwell was acting?
§ Mr. MACPHERSONObviously I have not been able to consult Sir John Maxwell since the hon. Member put this question yesterday, nor, in view of the statements which have already been made and in particular of that made by the late Home Secretary on 3rd July, can I think that the hon. Member is really ignorant of the course which was followed as regards consultation of legal authorities?
§ Mr. GINNELLHaving regard to the comment made by the Leader of the House yesterday, I beg to ask now whether the hon. Gentleman is aware that the law expressly requires trial by field general court-martial to be held in open Court; whether he is aware that execution not in accordance with the law is murder; and whether a public servant, if he has illegally executed fifteen men and illegally sentenced 130 to penal servinude, is not to be asked under what law he is supposed to be acting?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member must give notice of that question.
§ Mr. GINNELLI would point out that this question, under one form or another, has been running on the Paper since last July, and I would respectfully ask you, Sir, to observe that it involves the charge of murder against a public servant.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI will consider that when I see it in writing.
§ 95. Mr. T. M. HEALYasked the Home Secretary whether women enduring penal servitude by sentences of Irish courts-martial are receiving the same concessions as have been announced for men; and under what authority are such sentences being enforced in England?
§ Sir G. CAVEThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second part of the question, the authority is Sections 58, 59, and 62 of the Army Act, 1881, as applied by Section 1 (4) of the Defence of the Realm Consolidation Act, 1914.
§ Mr. BYRNEIs the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that there are two Irish ladies interned in Aylesbury; that they are without trial and have been there eight months; will he consider their case and allow their release before Christmas?
§ Sir G. CAVEThat question does not arise.
§ Mr. BYRNEOn a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask why questions are being refused in regard to these two ladies, who are interned without trial?
§ Sir G. CAVEI am not refusing any questions.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe reason the questions are refused is because the hon. Member has asked the same question, I will not say a hundred times, but getting on that way.
§ Mr. BYRNEI have asked the question thirteen times, and as that is considered an unlucky number, perhaps you will allow me to put it the fourteenth?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is convicting himself.