§ 53. Mr. WINGasked the Prime Minister if a different method of dealing with conscientious objectors, as suggested by the late Lord Kitchener and further emphasised to a deputation of the leaders of the free churches, is about to be put in operation; and, if so, when this is to be done?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI hope to be able to make a general statement on this subject to-morrow.
§ 55. Mr. MORRELLasked the Prime Minister whether Private Howard Marten and three other conscientious objectors now serving in France have been sentenced by court-martial to be shot; and, if so, whether these sentences have been commuted?
57. Mr. E. HARVEYasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the court-martial held at Boulogne upon Howard Marten, a member of the Society of Friends, and three other conscientious objectors to military service, at which the Court sentenced these men to death by shooting; whether this sentence was subsequently commuted to ten years' penal servitude by the Commander-in-Chief of the British Forces in France; and whether, in view of the promises given in Parliament by various members of the Government and the provisions of the Military Service Act, any steps are to be taken to prevent similar action by courts-martial in future?
§ 68 and 69. Mr. WHITEHOUSEasked the Prime Minister, as acting Secretary of State for War, (1) whether four conscientious objectors were court-martialled in France on 2nd June and sentenced to death by shooting; whether this sentence has been commuted to ten years' penal servitude; what action he proposes to take; and (2) whether the four conscientious objectors who, on 2nd June, were sentenced to death by shooting, the sentence being commuted to ten years' penal servitude, were Howard Marten, a member of the Society of Friends, who had previously been sentenced at Harwich to twenty-eight days' cells, a diet of bread and water, and confinement in irons; 522 Henry Scullard, a Congregationalist and secretary of a Young Men's Christian Association; John Ring, of Barnet, who had previously suffered solitary confinement, bread and water diet, and confinement in irons; and J. Foister, of Cambridge?
§ 101 and 102. Mr. SNOWDENasked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) if four conscientious objectors named Marten, Scullard, Foister, and Ring, were sentenced to be shot at Boulogne on 17th June; if this sentence has been commuted to ten years' penal servitude; if the men are now in the prison at Rouen; if so, why the Army Order of 25th May last, directing that conscientious objectors sentenced to imprisonment must be immediately sent to a civil prison, has not been carried out in these cases, will this course be followed at once in these cases; and (2) if twenty-one conscientious objectors were court-martialled at Boulogne on 17th June, and if four of this number had the death sentence imposed, which was later commuted to ten years' penal servitude; if the sentences on the other seventeen have since been promulgated, if so, what are the sentences; if the sentences are imprisonment, will all these men be immediately brought to England for confinement in a civil prison; and if the eleven men now in prison at Henriville and the nine in prison at Rouen will also be immediately treated under the Army Order of 25th May last?
§ 104. Sir W. BYLESasked whether it is intended to send another batch of conscientious objectors to France this week; and whether any of those already sent have been condemned to be shot?
110 and 113. Mr. E. HARVEYasked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) whether Messrs. J. Foister, H. Marten, Ring, and Scullard, who, as conscientious objectors to military service and members of the Non-Combatant Corps, were, for refusing to obey military orders, sentenced on 17th June to death by shooting, and whose sentence was at once commuted to ten years' penal servitude, have been taken from Boulogne to Rouen; whether any steps have yet been taken for their removal to a civil prison in England; and (2) whether he is now able to make any statement as to the position of conscientious objectors who have been drafted into the Army under protest and are continuing to resist military orders?
§ Mr. TENNANTMy right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has asked me to answer Questions Nos. 57, 68 and 69, and I will also answer the other questions which are addressed to myself and deal with the same matters. It is the case that courts-martial held in France have, in the exercise of their judicial functions, sentenced certain men professing conscientious objections to death for offences punishable by death under the Army Act. In all these cases—thirty-four in number—I am informed the sentence has been commuted to penal servitude by the Commander-in-Chief in France. In accordance with Sections 61 and 62 of the Army Act, prisoners sentenced to penal servitude must undergo their sentence in the United Kingdom in a civil prison, and this statutory provision will, of course, be given effect. In reply to Question 103, I would state that no companies of the Non-Combatant Corps are to be sent to France this week. On the matter generally, I may inform those hon. Members who are interested that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister hopes to make a statement on this subject to-morrow.
§ Mr. MORRELLMay I, in the first place, ask whether the Prime Minister's statement will be made in such a form as to allow of debate afterwards?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI cannot say that, but opportunity will doubtless be given in debate afterwards.
§ Mr. MORRELLMay I ask, further, whether all the conscientious objectors who have been sent to France, and are and have been disobeying orders on conscientious grounds since they have been in France, will now be immediately recalled to this country?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir, I can not give such a pledge.
§ Mr. OUTHWAITEHow can the right hon. Gentleman account for the fact that he has again and again misled the House as to the condition—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order, order!"]—yes—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member can hardly expect a reply if he puts his question in that form.
§ Mr. KINGAre we to understand that thirty-four men have been sentenced to be shot, and that all of these have had their sentences commuted to penal servitude for ten years, or some other period?
§ Mr. TENNANTThe reply to the first part of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative—that is to say, that all the sentences have been commuted. Whether or not they have all been commuted for ten years I do not know, but the first lot, at any rate, have been.
§ Mr. SNOWDENIf these cases have been commuted to penal servitude or imprisonment, as I understand they have, why are these men not to come back to England at once and put into a civil prison?
§ Mr. TENNANTIf my hon. Friend had listened to my answer—
§ Mr. SNOWDENI did listen to it.
§ Mr. TENNANTHe would have understood that they have been.
Mr. CHANCELLORAre persons liable to the death penalty other than those who are guilty of desertion in the face of the enemy?
§ Mr. TENNANTIf my hon. Friend will refer to Section 9 of the Army Act he will see the offences for which the death penalty can be applied.
Colonel GRIFFITHSIf these thirty-four men are sentenced to death for disobeying the orders of their superior officers, why are they not shot like other soldiers?
§ Mr. KINGInasmuch as the Non-Combatant Corps are never brought in face of the enemy, are we to understand that these men were not in the Non-Combatant Corps, but in a combatant unit?
§ Mr. TENNANTI do not think that is so, but I think the majority, if not all of these men, would be in the Non-Combatant Corps.
§ Mr. KINGIn view of what the right hon. Gentleman said on Thursday night, he must remember when he stated—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is not now asking a question.
§ 58. Mr. MORRELLasked the Prime Minister if he will institute inquiries into the allegations that have been made by many persons of the ill-treatment suffered by a number of conscientious objectors, whose names can be given, on or about 17th June, at Prees Heath Camp, near Whitchurch, Salop, and in particular if he 525 will ascertain whether these men after being kept some time without food were punched, kicked, knocked down, and undressed and scrubbed with a stiff sink brush till they were sore and bleeding; whether a man named Lance-Corporal Barker was brought in specially to give this treatment; whether appeals were made by the men to be tried by court-martial; whether this was refused by the commanding officer, Colonel Bolton; and whether, in view of the fact that these allegations are made by men of the highest respectability, coming from Burnley, Nelson, and other Lancashire towns, and that their failure to obey orders was due to conscientious motives, he will see that a searching investigation is made into all the circumstances of the case?
§ Mr. TENNANTInquiry is being made into these allegations, the correctness of which J. must not be taken as accepting.
§ Mr. MORRELLCan the right hon. Gentleman tell me how the inquiry will be made and whether the result will be published?
§ Mr. TENNANTAs a rule we do not publish the result of inquiries of this kind which are directed to an individual case. My hon. Friend has addressed many similar inquiries to me and I have always given an answer.
§ Mr. SNOWDENMay I ask whether, in view of the allegation of brutal treatment by non-commissioned officers and officers of conscientious objectors, the right hon. Gentleman will have a thorough inquiry made and the evidence of these men taken?
§ Mr. TENNANTI would ask my hon. Friend to remember that we are in the middle of a great war, and that we are endeavouring to obtain soldiers. I have never refused to cause inquiries to be made into individual cases where there is any reason to suppose anything has been done which ought not to be done which is either cruel or contrary to the instructions which we give, but I really would ask hon. Members to make some kind of inquiry for themselves first, in order that they may be reasonably sure that a primâ facie case is made out, before I take up the time of my office in conducting that kind of inquiry.
§ Mr. MORRELLWill the inquiry take any more precise form than a mere letter 526 addressed by the Adjutant-General to the Commanding Officer and the Commanding Officer's reply? Will it be in any sense an independent inquiry?
§ Mr. TENNANTAll these inquiries are made by communicating with the General Officer in Command, who puts the machinery in motion.
§ Mr. SNOWDENThat is to say, then, that the only evidence the War Office takes is the evidence of the incriminated parties themselves?
§ 70. Mr. WHITEHOUSEasked the Prime Minister, as acting Secretary of State for War, whether Mr. C. H. Norman is still confined in Wandsworth Detention Barracks; whether, on 23rd May, he was confined in a straight jacket, which was too small and caused him great agony; whether the then commandant, who has since been removed, mocked at him; whether Mr. Norman fainted and was left unconscious on the floor for an hour; whether he was afterwards taken to hospital; and whether he returned to the barracks on 31st May and was again subjected to brutality by the then commandant?
§ Mr. TENNANTNorman is still in Wandsworth Detention Barracks. As he threatened suicide he was placed in restraint on the date mentioned. He was removed to hospital. On the 31st May he was sent to detention barracks. The punishment inflicted and the treatment accorded to Norman have been in accordance with the rules for detention barracks, and it is not right to say that he was subjected to brutality by the commandant, though that officer behaved incorrectly and without discretion in expressing his personal views.
§ 85. Mr. KINGasked whether the Rev. F. B. Meyer was permitted by the late Lord Kitchener to visit camps in France where conscientious objectors are now detained; whether Mr. Meyer in one camp saw and conversed with fourteen such men, now prisoners, who had been for some time on bread and water diet; whether in another camp Mr. Meyer interviewed twenty-one conscientious objectors undergoing detention punishment, who were confined under guard; and whether the report which Mr. Meyer has published of his visit, relating to these and other facts, was submitted to the War Office?
§ Mr. TENNANTNo, sir. No report by the Rev. F. B. Meyer has been submitted to the War Office, and I was unaware that he had prepared any report.
92. Mr. E. HARVEYasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the treatment by the local military authorities at Chelmsford Detention Barracks of Frank Ward, a member of the Society of Friends and a conscientious objector to military service; whether, because of his persistent refusal to take part in military drill, he was bound with ropes and dragged along the ground until blood was drawn; whether in consequence of his ill-treatment he had to be removed to a hospital; whether he will be placed again under the same conditions; and whether any steps are to be taken to prevent the continuance of this method of persecution?
§ Mr. TENNANTI am making inquiries, but in the meantime I must not be taken as accepting the allegations contained in the question as accurate.
§ 98. Mr. SNOWDENasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if the late commandant at Wandsworth Detention Barracks, who was dismissed for the brutal treatment of conscientious objectors, has been appointed to some other post; and, if so, where and what is the appointment?
§ Mr. TENNANTNo, Sir; the late commandant at Wandsworth was not dismissed for brutal treatment of conscientious objectors. He has not been appointed to another post for further employment. He did not ask.
§ 99. Mr. SNOWDENasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if a conscientious objector named Arthur Slater is detained in the military prison at St. Alban's; if so, what is the sentence he is serving; by what Court he has been sentenced; what is his present state of health; when will he be allowed a visit; and why is he not given the benefit of the Army Order of 25th May last?
§ Mr. TENNANTIf my hon. Friend, from the information evidently in his possession, will state the man's regimental number and regiment, it might be possible to afford information, but as there is no allegation of ill-treatment there is no primâ facie case for inquiry.
§ Mr. SNOWDENAs this young man is a conscientious objector, it follows that he has not got either a regiment or num- 528 ber which he recognises, and therefore I am unable to give the right hon. Gentleman the information.
§ Mr. TENNANTPerhaps my hon. Friend will ascertain what his company or number is in the Non-Combatant Force.