§ 21. Mr. RICHARD LAMBERTasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that C. H. Norman and J. P. Hughes were court-martialled together on the same charge arising out of the same incidents at Princetown, and were each sentenced to two years' hard labour; that J. P. Hughes has now been allowed to take up work under the exceptional employment scheme and that C. H. Norman has been refused any work at all under any part of the Home Office scheme; and will he say why, seeing that there are now remissions of penalties on all connected with the Dartmoor strike after the death of Mr. Firth, C. H. Norman is especially and solely singled out for indefinite punishment?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir George Cave)The answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. In answer to the third part, the Committee on Employment of Conscientious Objectors, in considering whether a man who has been recalled to his unit as the result of an offence shall be given a second chance of service under them, have, of course, to take into consideration not only the circumstances of the offence, but also the man's previous record while under their control. In the present case the evidence before the Committee showed that there was a material difference between the two men, both as to their responsibility for the refusal to work at Princetown and as to their previous record, and they decided that Norman could not be allowed to resume work under the Committee.
§ Sir G. CAVENo; I believe that has nothing whatever to do with it.
§ Mr. KINGAs that is the only thing which suggests itself to those persons who know the whole history of this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman be a little more explicit and say what there is against this man who has been thus victimised?
§ Sir G. CAVEA Committee considered the whole case. The man's conduct was not satisfactory, and he took a much more active part than the other man did in promoting what was called the strike at Princetown.
§ Mr. KINGIs not the right hon. Gentleman aware that that has been definitely met by many witnesses and was not asserted in this House when we had a discussion?