HC Deb 15 November 1916 vol 87 cc764-5
40. Mr. SNOWDEN

asked the Secretary of State for War whether in the case of Private Kennedy, No. 48620, 75th Training Reserve Battalion, No. 9 Camp, U Company, Hut 21, Prees Heath, Whitchurch, the officer having power to convene a court-martial allowed more than fifteen days to elapse without reporting the case to the Army Council, and kept Private Kennedy in the detention room over three weeks without sending in the special reports prescribed by the Army Act and Rules of Procedure; whether his attention has been called to the fact that, under paragraph 490 of the King's Regulations, Kennedy should have been set at liberty when evidence was not forthcoming to establish the charge against him, and that the limit of the period for close arrest under the Army Act and King's Regulations is seven days; and, seeing that the placing of Private Kennedy in close arrest for three weeks was a contravention of the Army Act and King's Regulations, will he say what remedy a soldier has when treated in this manner?

Mr. FORSTER

Private J. Kennedy was placed in arrest on 3rd October, and remanded for trial by court-martial on charges under Section 40 of the Army Act for "conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline." He was kept in confinement during the preparation of the case and after its submission to higher authority. The hon. Member is in error in his supposition that under paragraph 490 of the King's Regulations it is incumbent upon a commanding officer to release an accused from arrest under the conditions suggested by the hon. Member. The release of a soldier under that paragraph is purely permissive, and not obligatory. The placing of Private Kennedy in close arrest for three weeks was not a contravention of the Army Act or the King's Regulations; and in regard to my hon. Friends observations in regard to the special reports, I would draw his attention to the answer which I gave him on 19th October. If he will again refer to Section 45 of the Army Act, he will find that his interpretation of the law is not accurate.