16. Sir H. DALZIELasked the Secretary to the Admiralty the exact offence which led to the expulsion from Portsmouth of Ernest Walter Dickes, an Admiralty official receiving a salary of £485 per annum, who claims exemption from military service as a conscientious objector; when arrested at Portsmouth in September, 1915, what was the result of the police examination, and why, when removed from Portsmouth, Dickes was transferred to the National Debt Office; and, if it was then desirable to remove him from Admiralty employ, why he is now working at the Admiralty?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAMr. Dickes was ordered to leave Portsmouth by the competent military authority. The order for his removal was issued in pursuance of Article 14 of the Defence of the Realm Regulations, which provides for the removal of persons "suspected of acting, or of having acted, or being about to act in a manner prejudicial to the public safety or the defence of the realm." No specific reason for his removal was given. The result of the police examination was that the prosecution was withdrawn, and the charge brought against Mr. Dickes was therefore dismissed by the magistrates. Mr. Dickes was then lent to the National Debt Office because the Admiralty considered that he had, through his own improper behaviour and lack of discretion, brought himself into bad odour with the naval and military authorities at Portsmouth, and that it was expedient that he should for a time serve in a Department where he could not possibly be brought into contact with these authorities. At a later stage, the National Debt Office decided that Mr. Dickes could not be regarded as indispensable. Mr. Dickes appealed as a con- 1399 scientious objector to the Lambeth Tribunal, and the tribunal admitted his claim subject to the condition that he should undertake work which, not being under military control, was nevertheless useful for the prosecution of the War. The Committee on Work of National Importance, to whom the matter was referred, recommended that Mr. Dickes should be allowed to continue in civilian employment under the Crown. In view of this, and with the object of coping with the increasing pressure of work at the Admiralty, Mr. Dickes was transferred to the Department of the Accountant-General of the Navy, and the Committee on Work of National Importance informed the tribunal that they could recommend no work of national importance more useful for the prosecution of the War than that in which he is now employed in this Department. As I have already stated, in view of the position taken up by the Lambeth Tribunal, Mr. Dickes' continued employment in his present office is under consideration.
Sir H. DALZIELIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that some people have already resigned rather than serve in the same office with this gentleman, and that others have resigned and have been asked to reconsider their position until a decision is come to; and does not the right hon. Gentleman think it is time that this gentleman was removed?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThis is the first I have heard of it. I will certainly make inquiries. Mr. Dickes, as I have said already, is at work in connection with the payments to the dependants of deceased sailors, and is continued in employment in that office.
Sir H. DALZI ELIs it or is it not a fact that this gentleman described himself as an advocate of pro-Germanism?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI do not think that is quite right. Mr. Dickes showed great indiscretion and great stupidity. I understand he filled up a sample form in which, I suppose stung by the comment made upon his pacifist views, he thought he had better proclaim himself in favour of German propaganda. That is my interpretation. It is the most charitable interpretation. I do not defend his action; certainly not. I have stated that I put a perfectly charitable interpretation upon it. I have said twice that if my right hon. Friend 1400 would put down a question for this day week I will give a final answer as to what will be the future of this gentleman.
§ Mr. G. FABERCannot, a man with a more savory record be found to earn public money and do this work?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAMr. Dickes has been twenty years in the public service. I understand that recently, since the War, he has expressed pacifist views. That is what I understand the hon. Member to refer to. I have said that his position will be carefully looked into.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that dependants of deceased soldiers and sailors do not require the services of this man?
§ Sir S. COLLINSIs it a crime to hold these views?
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEYes, it is.