HC Deb 16 November 1916 vol 87 cc993-4
100. Mr. HOGGE

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the recent case of Robert Hardy v. Meakers, heard at the City of London Court on 3rd October last, and the fact that Hardy was successful at the hearing of that action, in which complaint was made by him that his order books had been improperly used by someone while they were in the possession of the Metropolitan Police, and the evidence proved that an overcoat had been ordered on Hardy's canteen manager's form on a date when he, Hardy, was in the custody of the police and the said forms were in their possession; if he will state by whose instructions was the special constable acting when he attempted to obtain Hardy's signature to certain papers on 2nd October last; if he will cause further inquiries as to what has become of Hardy's property, including his registration card, medical rejection paper, dated 17th November, 1915, and his bank book, which, with other property, was taken possession of by the police, and has not been returned to him; and if he will reconsider his decision of 5th July last, and allow inquiry into the facts of the case?

Mr. SAMUEL

I cannot enter into a discussion of the details of this case, but the statements on which the hon. Member's question is founded are not in accordance with the facts, and no action is called for on my part. The officer referred to as a "special constable" was a permanent police official attached to the General Post Office, who was deputed to inquire into a claim made by Hardy against that Department. As stated in my reply to the hon. Member on the 5th July last, the whole of Hardy's personal property in the possession of the police was restored to him on his release from prison, with the exception of his Savings Bank book. This, in accordance with custom, was handed to the Savings Bank Department of the General Post Office for safe keeping and was returned to him by that Department.

Mr. HOGGE

Is it untrue that this order was made on the firm while Hardy was in prison?

Mr. SAMUEL

I cannot enter into those points.

Mr. PRINGLE

If the right hon. Gentleman has investigated the case, can he not say whether or not it is a fact that the order was given on a firm while the man was in prison?

Mr. SAMUEL

I am informed that all these statements are untrue.

Mr. ASHLEY

If a Minister states that a question is inaccurate, ought he not to state in what respect it is inaccurate?

Mr. SAMUEL

The matter is a very complicated one, and it is impossible, in answer to a question, to go into all the details of the ease.