§ 59. Mr. PRINGLEasked the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the decision of the Central Appeal Tribunal in the case of Angus M'Nab Chassels, Coatbridge; what was the constitution of the tribunal which gave the decision; whether this decision reversed the unanimous findings of the local and county Appeal Tribunals; whether the case put before the Central Tribunal by the military representative contained statements which had been disproved in evidence at former hearings; whether the local tribunal has protested against the decision of the Central Tribunal; whether the treatment given to Mr. Chassels, as compared with other men in the same trade in Coatbridge, has given rise to general dissatisfaction; and whether, in these circumstances, the case of Mr. Chassels will be 1296 reopened by the Central Appeal Tribunal, so that he may have an opportunity of being legally represented and thus disproving the untrue statements put forward as the basis of the appeal by the military representative?
§ Mr. MUNROMy attention has not been previously drawn to this case. I ant informed that the appeal was decided in the ordinary course of the proceedings of the Central Tribunal. I am aware that the decision of the Central Tribunal was contrary to the decisions of the local and Appeal Tribunals. Every opportunity was afforded to Mr. Chassels to submit to the Central Tribunal representations in support of his ease, and the representations put forward by him, which dealt with the alleged inaccurate statements made by the National Service representative, were very carefully considered by the Central Tribunal when arriving at their decision. Representations relative to the alleged misstatements by the National Service representative were also received from the local tribunal after the case was decided. They were very fully considered, but the Central Tribunal saw no reason for altering their decision. I am unaware that the decision of the Central Tribunal has given rise to dissatisfaction in the district. I can assure my hon. and learned Friend that the full facts of the case were before the Central Tribunal when they arrived at their decision. The case has been very fully considered by the Central Tribunal, as I am informed, on no fewer than three occasions, and they see no reason for reopening the matter.