§ 66. Mr. INSKIPasked the Secretary of State for War whether the Non-Combatant Corps still contains a number of conscientious objectors who were prepared to accept the obligation of national service; and whether, in view of the statement made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department on the 4th August that there are no conscientious objectors in prison or under control, directions can now be given for the immediate discharge of all such persons from the Non-Combatant Corps in order that they may be treated as well as the conscientious objectors who refused any national service?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe Non-Combatant Corps is, and always has been, entirely composed of men whose conscience permits them to serve as British soldiers, though it dos not permit them to take human life, and who have been granted non-combatant exemption by the tribunals. The Corps was set up by Royal Warrant, and its members are just as much soldiers as, for example, members of the Army Pay Corps, Royal Army Veterinary Corps, and Royal Army Medical Corps, from the point of view of the Army, therefore, these men must be regarded as soldiers, and not as conscientious objectors, and there is no more case for their special discharge than there is for the special discharge of any other serving soldiers.
§ Mr. INSKIPIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that every one of these men holds a certificate granted to him describing him as a conscientious objector? Having been described as such are they not 1293 entitled to better treatment than rebellious persons who have been released from gaol?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo. It is one thing at this stage in our affairs to let a conscientious objector out of gaol after he has done a long period of very rigorous punishment, and it is quite another thing to give an actual preference to persons professing these views in regard to other men serving in the same corps.
§ Mr. INSKIPIs it not a fact that these men are receiving worse treatment than the men who have been released from gaol?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, I do not admit for a moment that service in the Non-Combatant Corps alongside of other men is any worse treatment than that to which the enormous majority of men now serving in the Army are subjected, and it bears no comparison at all with imprisonment with hard labour.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODNow that we are all trying to be economical would it not be possible to discharge these men from service when they are simply a burden on the country's finance?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI do not agree at all. If it is a question of the abolition of the Non-Combatant Corps that is a matter which must be considered as a whole and in its proper place. If it is a question of allowing men who are conscientious objectors serving in the Non-Combatant Corps to have a preference over other men in the Non-Combatant Corps, that would be an act of injustice.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODAs these people are rendering no service, and not adding to the security of the country in the way ordinary soldiers are, why should we continue the upkeep of all these regiments?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI am not prepared to give that privilege to these men. I do not agree that we have given any privilege to the conscientious objectors who are released from gaol. They are being released after very severe suffering.