§ 71. Sir WILLIAM BYLESasked the Home Secretary whether Emanuel Ribiero, a conscientious objector, belonging to North Salford, is still at Lord Derby's War Hospital at Winwick, near Warrington; whether he is still hunger-striking and being forcibly fed; whether he describes the process as slow mental and physical torture likely to end in his death or loss of reason; whether he is still confined to one room and denied visitors, or reading, or correspondence; whether he has suffered this discipline for five months; and whether the sole reason is that he is a genuine conscientious objector to taking the life of his fellow man, and is entitled to complete exemption provided under the Military Service Act?
§ Mr. MACPHERSONRibiero is still in the Lord Derby War Hospital. He is hunger-striking, and is being fed by tube. He makes no resistance, so that this feeding cannot be described as forcible. He is still confined to a large two-bedded ward, and is allowed visits from his wife and pastor. His weight is maintained, and I am told that his present condition is good. There is no restriction to his correspondence, but it is necessarily censored. Ribiero has been in this hospital since 25th January, 1917, and has been treated under the same conditions from that date. In regard to the last part of the question, I would point out that the tribunal apparently did not share my hon. Friend's views as to this man's title to exemption from military service.
§ Sir W. BYLESIs not this obviously a case of a man who, under the Military Service Act, is entitled to total exemption? If so, why does the Government go on punishing him?
§ Mr. MACPHERSONIt is not a question. I would point out to my hon. Friend, for the Government, but for the tribunal. The tribunal decided that he ought not to be exempt.
§ Mr. KINGDoes the Government really think it worth while to spend all the money and time, and have all the misery of these months of treatment, for no good whatsoever?
74. Mr. E. HARVEYasked the Home Secretary whether the Committee on Employment of Conscientious Objectors has made efforts to employ on medical work qualified medical practitioners referred to their oversight; whether the Committee have communicated with the Local Government Board and the Insurance Commissioners as to the shortage of medical men for the supply of the needs of the civilian population and as to the best use which could be made of the services of medical men under the charge of the Committee; and, if not, whether this will be done?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY Of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Brace)The answer to these questions is in the negative. The Committee was appointed for the purpose of employing men who had been sentenced to imprisonment by courts-martial in groups under proper supervision and control. They were expressly precluded from treating them as if they had received absolute exemptions, and allowing them to return to their homes or to resume their ordinary occupations.
Mr. HARVEYIs it not possible to send these medical men to other work far from their homes where they would be of public service?