§ 68. Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the conscientious objectors stationed at Knutsford have been transferred to the Princetown Settlement in South Devon; whether he is aware that the village of Princetown is a summer resort for people in the West Country seeking health and change of air and that the inhabitants resent the presence of the many hundreds of conscientious objectors now overrunning this part of Dartmoor; that 1214 these men are under no discipline out side working hours; and that practically Princetown and its immediate neighbour hood are now in possession of conscientious objectors; will he say why conscientious objectors were taken away from Knutsford; whether he received any complaints from the local residents about the conscientious objectors while there; and, if so, what was the nature of the complaints?
§ Mr. BRACEThe answer to the first three parts of the question is in the affirmative, except that some only of the conscientious objectors at Knutsford have been transferred to Princetown. Strong complaints were received from Knutsford against retaining a work centre for conscientious objectors in a populous centre in which there were two auxiliary hospitals for wounded soldiers, and it was. decided, before the recent disturbances at Knutsford, to move the centre from that place. The men at Princetown work for the greater part of the day and remain under certain disciplinary restrictions out of working hours.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEWere there no other causes of complaint than the fact that these two hospitals were in the neighbourhood?
§ 69. Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been, called to the allegation that on 11th May two conscientious objectors stopped to sneer at a man who had lost his foot in France, that one of the conscientious objectors was a professional pugilist, and: that a soldier passing thrashed one of the conscientious objectors, whereupon the other conscientious objector joined in the fight and struck the soldier with a stick over the head and face; and will he see that men who apparently have no objection to fighting British soldiers are sent to take their proper place in the Army at the front, so that their fighting proclivities may be used against the enemy?
§ Mr. BRACEThe Committee saw a reference to this incident in the Press and made immediate inquiries with a view to disciplinary action. It has, however, been found impossible so far to identify any of the parties.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEDoes the right hon. Gentleman mean to say that he has not sufficient control over the conscientious objectors to enable him to discover who were these two men who were walking along the road?
§ Mr. SNOWDENHas the right hon. Gentleman been able to find who was the soldier who lost his foot in the War?
§ 70. Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that permission was given to the Rev. N. B. Walke, of Cornwall, to address the conscientious objectors at Princetown on the condition attached to that permission that Mr. Walke was to obstain from political propaganda; whether he is aware that after the service in the prison Mr. Walke visited the hostel or club kept up by the conscientious objectors in the village, where he met a number of conscientious objectors; that on leaving the hostel a document fell from his pocket bearing the headings Objects of the Brotherhood, Constitution. Conditions of Membership; that one of the objects of the brotherhood cited in the document was to create a common fund to enable men and women to obtain a livelihood and to maintain their families engaged in propaganda and other work; and whether, in view of the fact that this hostel is being used for propaganda work, he will cause it to be immediately closed?
§ Mr. BRACEI am informed that Mr. Walke was given permission to hold religious services in the centre on condition that; he confined himself to religious topics. As to his activities outside the centre, I have no information, but the statements in the question will be considered by the Committee.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKETs this the first time that this has been brought to the notice of the hon. Gentleman?
§ 71. Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can say if any minister other than Mr, Walke has been given, a 1216 similar privilege with regard to addressing the conscientious objectors, and with the same condition attached thereto; whether any complaint has been received by the Home Office of such privilege having been abused; and what action was taken in the matter?
§ Mr. BRACEOther ministers have been given similar permissions subject to the same condition. No complaint of abuse has been received.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEIs the right hon. Gentleman certain of the last statement which he has made?