52. Sir HENRY DALZIELasked the Prime Minister if all the recommendations of the Advisory Committee of the Home Office as to internment of alien 1714 enemies have been acted upon, and if among those interned any have been subsequently released without the recommendation of the Committee?
§ Sir G. CAVEThe Committee referred to was appointed as an Advisory Committee, and the final responsibility for internment or exemption has always rested with the Secretary of State. I understand that in the years 1915 and 1916 a small number of persons recommended by the Committee for internment were on further inquiry exempted from internment, but a considerably larger number who were recommended for exemption were on full inquiry ordered to be interned. No such case has occurred since the year 1916, the Committee having in the course of that year concluded their inquiries into the applications for exemption. Since that date a few interned persons have been released for special reasons, but in these cases the Secretary of State has acted upon information furnished to him, and not on the advice of any Committee.
Sir H. DALZIELCan my right hon. Friend say whether, in the cases where the recommendations of the Advisory Committee were made, the official who failed to carry out their decisions had in his mind the fact that two judges of the High Court used to the weighing of evidence and throe or four influential Members of this House had unanimously recommended that these persons should be interned?
§ Sir G. CAVEAll these things happened before my time, but I am quite sure that the Secretary of State took that fact into account.
§ Mr. KINGIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that certain persons have been releasd from internment in view of the fact that they had sons who had died in the service of the country or who were soldiers in our Army?
§ Sir G. CAVEIt may be so. I do not remember the facts of any special case, but I am quite sure that no release was sanctioned without inquiry.
§ Sir G. CAVEI cannot give any names. There are more than two.
§ 92. Mr. GILBERTasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he has received any applications from London boards of guardians for payment and allowances to their relieving officers for services rendered in making inquiries about and payments to the British wives and children of enemy aliens; whether he is aware that extra work has been done by these officers; and, as it is national work caused by the War, can he see his way to consider favourably such applications, so as to prevent any charge for such work being put upon the local rates of a district?
§ Mr. BALDWINOne such application has been received, but the Treasury were unable to entertain it, though they realise the value of the work performed by relieving officers. It must, however, be borne in mind that the cost of the relief to the wives and children is borne by the Exchequer, local authorities being thereby freed from substantial charges which might otherwise have fallen upon them in respect of the support of destitute persons resident within their areas. It does not therefore appear unreasonable that comparatively small administrative expenses in this connection should remain as a charge on the rates.
§ 94. Colonel WEDGWOODasked the Home Secretary whether Theodolinda Paster, who was denounced as a spy when returning to Greece on 26th June, 1915, and handed over to a British warship, is now interned in Holloway Gaol; whether any evidence of her being a spy was obtained; and whether, after three years' internment, she can now be brought to trial or deported?
§ Sir G. CAVEThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. This woman, who is a German subject, and was in touch with German agents, was interned under No. 14B of the Defence of the Realm Regulations on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee. I think internment was the proper course, and that this is not a case for prosecution or deportation.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODIs it not pretty safe to release her seeing that she has been in prison for the last three years?
§ 97. Mr. KINGasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that Rudolf Rocker, a journalist, who threw off his 1716 German citizenship seventeen years ago, was for many months interned in Alexandra Palace, was recently sent to Holland, where the authorities sought to drive him into Germany, and that the German authorities refused him admittance, as he was suspected of being an agent of Lord Northcliffe, Director of Propaganda In Enemy Countries; and whether, as R. Rocker is now residing in Holland, he will permit his wife and family to rejoin him there?
§ Sir G. CAVERocker, the man referred to in this question, has claimed to have lost his German nationality by absence from Germany; but by English law he is a German subject, and as such was first interned at the Alexandra Palace and afterwards, at his own request, repatriated through Holland to Germany. I understand that the German authorities sent him back to Holland, but I am unable to say on what ground they did so. He was certainly not an agent of the Director of Propaganda. I am not aware that he has a wife or family in this country.
§ Sir G. CAVEI will watch the efforts of the hon. Gentleman in that direction.