Motion made, and Question proposed.
That a sum, not exceeding £86,153, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Prison Commissioners for Scotland, and of the Prisons under their control, including the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics. Defectives, and Inmates of the State Inebriate Reformatory, the Preparation of Judicial Statistics, and a Grant for certain Expenses connected with Discharged Prisoners."—[Note: £65,000 has been voted on account.]
§ Mr. MAXTON
This Vote is not often discussed in this House, but the fact that we had some new legislation on the subject during last Session brought the matter before our attention, and that justifies us now in spending some part of the Committee's time in looking at this particular branch of public administration. The first point upon which I desire information is as to the exact changes that have taken place in the distribution of the prison population as a result of the Prisons (Scotland) Act, 1926. While that Act was passing through the House I expressed certain fears as to its possible effect. I was very doubtful of the wisdom of allowing men to be detained in local legalised police cells for a period of 30 days. I would like to know how many of these police Cells have been legalised under the new Act and how many prisoners have been detained in legalised police cells who would before the passing of the Act have been sent to ordinary prisons. I should like to know, also, if the right hon. Gentleman can give me any idea whether or not the new system is working well. I was glad to see in one part of the Report of the Scottish Prison Commissioners that one prisoner had escaped 654 from a legalised police cell. That was a gratifying feature, and if it became general a very large part of my objection would be removed; but the fact that there has only been one shows that there is only a small improvement on the ordinary prison system.
I should like to call attention to some statistics. Of all the prisoners in Scotland during the year 1926, 15,000 in all, there were only 93 who were sentenced for more than one year, and a very large proportion, more than 14,000 of the total 15,000, were sentenced to periods of three months or less. Almost half of the prisoners in Scotland were serving sentences of 14 days and under. I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that it is not worth while sending a man to prison for 14 days. A man who is only worthy of a sentence of 14 days is not a criminal in the real sense of the term. He is not a real menace to society. Society is not in any serious danger, and it seems to me a waste of public money and a waste of men to make them gaolbirds for a sentence of 14 days, and I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he could use his influence, or if his colleague the Lord Advocate could use his perhaps greater influence in these matters, so as to see that magistrates throughout the country do not sentence men to imprisonment when really they should be put on probation, or if he would see that the magistrates throughout the country where they are inflicting a fine with the alternative of imprisonment, should give very long periods and easy instalments for the paying up of the necessary fine.
Even supposing he did not get the fine in the long run, I think it would be an economy and in the interests of public decency to lose the 10s. fine rather than to keep that man in prison for 14 days. The Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) showed that it cost something approaching 655 £2 a week to keep a man in Peterhead convict prison, and that it costs almost as much, 30s. a week, to keep a man in an ordinary prison. It is poor national economy to put a man in gaol at the expense to the community of a couple of pounds because he is too poor to pay a fine of 10s. or £1. If the right hon. Gentleman cannot extend to a very large extent the use of the probation system to keep men out of prison, and to keep them clear of other penalties except the penalty of probation and being looked after, which is an objectionable thing in itself—if he cannot see his way to put a large number of these short-term people on probation, let him at least arrange with the magistrates that the longest possible time be given for the payment of instalments. By that way, I think, we could reduce the Scottish prison population to one-half of what it is to-day.
I want to congratulate the Scottish Office on this report, as I did yesterday on the Scottish Fishery Report, and on the skill with which the reports are prepared and edited. It would be a very liberal education for the majority of Scotsmen if they read nothing else in the course of a year than the reports of the Board of Health, the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, and similar reports. They would know from these exactly how Scotland was working and was being administered. In this very valuable Report, we have at the end included many other things, short accounts of the life and the record of persons in various prisons. To me the description of the men or the women and the reasons why they were put in prison seems to stress the point I am trying to make that a very large proportion of the people who go to prison should never be there at all. Here is a person whose age is 55. That is too late to begin a successful life of crime. If you are not through your apprenticeship and a good journeyman before middle-age, you should not start at all. This man's offence is unlawfully lodging in a lavatory. Sentence, 10s. or five days. Was once fined for drunkenness. He was a Presbyterian, and attended Church regularly. He had a good upbringing, home comfortable, and parents kind, and he goes and sleeps in a lavatory when 55, and is branded as a criminal He is a church member and a churchgoer. 656 Working regularly in the pits, until 12 years ago, when he had an illness which incapacitated him and he was forbidden to work in a mine. Casual labour sine. Widower; wife died five years ago. Three children, all doing well. Never in prison until the day he committed this heinous offence of sleeping in a lavatory. He does not drink to any extent, and was never in trouble until his illness. Good intelligence. Not fit for anything but light sedentary work, which is difficult to obtain. Looks much older than his years.
I want to ask if public money should be spent in keeping a man like that in gaol? Is he a criminal? Possibly he is more a criminal now that he has done his five days than before. He is certainly marked as a gaol-bird among the people with whom he was in the habit of formerly associating, and his opportunity of securing a steady place in society has declined so much the less. There is another case which, if hon. Members will bear with me, I think I will be able to find. I can remember the details of the case sufficiently. Here is the case. It is the case of a woman who had been unemployed for a very considerable time. Age 28. Offence, fraud on the Ministry of Labour. I am glad my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary is here. Sentence, 14 days without the option of a fine. First offender. Then come some particulars about her parents which do not really matter. Went to church, Sunday school and Bible-class until 14. Was employed as a hair-spinner for 16 years. Married. Husband a miner not very good to her. No children. Husband deserted her. Went back to work after desertion, and was steadily employed until the coal dispute. Opened a small restaurant when thrown out of work and continued to draw unemployment benefit, though not entitled to do so. Never touches drink. Quite well-behaved woman who should not again commit an offence. I think it is positively disgraceful that the Ministry of Labour should have brought her into Court, and that a penalty of imprisonment should have been given without the option of a fine, and that we, the community, should turn her out into the streets branded as a gaol-bird.
I have one case very similar—a constituent of my own. I must admit at once that the right hon. Gentleman the 657 Minister of Labour, when the facts were fully presented to him, made arrangements whereby the amount for which the Ministry had been defrauded should be paid back. The man has continued his work and established himself as a very good citizen. This case is a similar one. There were 1,000,000 people unemployed. A man or a woman that has tried every available ordinary agency for employment has decided to start in some little business or other. They do not know whether they will have a wage in that business at the end of the week, or whether they are going to lose money out of it, and they carry it on for five or six weeks, and, very naturally, they are trying to back it both ways, and to see whether the business is going to prove a success or not. They carry on their business and draw insurance pay at the same time, but the Ministry of Labour says that is an attempt to defraud them, and here you have this woman of 28 years of age kept in prison for 14 days, because she has shown a keen desire to maintain herself instead of drawing unemployment benefit, only she wants to draw unemployment benefit until she sees whether her venture is going to be successful. You are backing it in many ways.
§ Mr. MAXTON
I want the right hon. Gentleman in his reply to give some assurance that as far as his influence is concerned he will try to prevent people of that sort being put into prison, or kept in prison. I know the limits of his jurisdiction. I know there are magistrates who must be allowed, if their office is to be maintained with any dignity, a fair degree of latitude in the sentences they give and the manner in which they commit people, but I know also the Lord Advocate is the head of our legal machinery, and the Secretary of State is the head of our general administration, and that they have a tremendous influence which, if used in this direction, can abolish a large proportion of our prison population.
One other point I want to bring forward. In the Vote there is a certain amount of money which is voted to pay prisoners a sort of gratuity when discharged from prison. The total amount is not very great, I regret to say, but there is a system in prison whereby a 658 good-conduct prisoner who performs his prison tasks adequately and fully each day is allowed so many marks, and in proportion to the amount of marks he has earned in the course of his sentence he receives a gratuity from the Commissioners on his discharge from prison. The amount for 1926—it is on page 88 of this Book, under the heading "R"—is £1,650. That is an increase of £50 over 1925. I do not know how far the Minister is bound by the existing law as to the restriction of the amount that shall be paid to a prisoner in the nature of a gratuity, but, if my recollection is correct, the amount is a penny for every 12 marks earned, and it takes a day and a half to earn 12 marks, so that it two days the prisoner gets about 1½d., provided that the work has been well done and that his conduct has been perfect. That is three farthings a day, and at the end of 30 days a prisoner, who has served that sentence, gets 90 farthings, which is something in the nature of two shillings. I know a prisoner who worked hard, and at the end of the year had something like 19 shillings, after doing all the work and earning all his marks. He had that as a gratuity when he was discharged, and had to face the world once more.
I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman if there is anything that compels him to limit the gratuity to that absolutely futile level? I say futile, in the sense that it is not sufficient to be of any use to a man when he returns into ordinary civil life and into his usual surroundings. It would not be a tremendous addition to the total Prison Vote if this sum of £1,650 were increased to something like £5,000 or £6,000, and the amount that each prisoner would receive on being discharged would be an appreciable amount that would be of some service in providing him with his first meal and his first night's lodging after coming out of prison. These are points that I wish to raise, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be able to satisfy me that the matter of the legalised police cells, as extended by the recent Act, is working well, and that in those places where he has legalised police cells the prisoners concerned are all receiving the normal conditions in the way of exercise, recreation, library, medical attendance, and the services of a chaplain, that they would receive if they 659 were confined in one of the ordinary prisons or in one of the convict settlements.
§ Mr. E. BROWN
I would like to reinforce what the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) has said about the short sentence. I want to point out to the Committee that this has special reference to juveniles, for there is one very tragic fact about the total of the juveniles. It appears from the Report that last year 1,293 juveniles were committed to prison, and of those 680 were committed without the option of a fine. It does seem to me that we might have a little more light on the passage in the Report which bears upon this, because it is obvious that those who drafted this very admirable Report had this point in mind. The Report says:It will be observed that more than half (680) were committed to prison without the option of a fine. Doubtless the great majority had been previously dealt with in some way or another, but the Commissioners repeat their recommendations in last year's report that Section 42 (2) (c) of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914, should be taken advantage of in Scotland. If this were done and proper supervision by probation officers provided, it is improbable that imprisonment would be necessary in a considerable number of those cases sentenced with option of a fine. This whole question has been under the consideration of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Secretary of State for Scotland of which the Chairman of the Prison Commission is a member. Evidence has been given before that Committee by several governors and others on behalf of the Prison Commissioners whose work has brought them into close contact with this problem. It is very desirable that every expedient be tried before commiting a young person to prison, even if a more severe sentence of imprisonment results as a last resort when other expedients have failed; it is more likely to be effective than repeated short sentences.I should like to hear from the Secretary of State What his opinion is about that observation, because it is so essential to give these juveniles their chance, and the fact that 680 children or young people should have been sentenced without the option of a fine does seem to call for some comment from this House. There is one tragic fact about the figures of this year. For the years from 1923 to 1925 there has been a progressive decline in the total figures. Even now they are very striking, and point to the law-abiding nature of the whole Scottish 660 nation. Out of a population, reaching this year to nearly 5,000,000, the total is 17,690—a very remarkable tribute to the law-abiding nature of the people of Scotland. This figure of 17,690 compares with 15,802 for 1925, and this increase is almost entirely due to the effect of the great dispute and to the convictions consequent upon the dispute in 1926. I notice there were 661 cases due to the coal trouble. I would ask the Secretary for Scotland if any of these cases are still in prison, or if by this time they have completed their sentences. I also want to ask this question. I notice that there is only one preventive institution for male criminals at Peterhead. I would like to know if there is any classification in the three classes, as I think there ought to be, between the habitual criminal, the redeemables and those who may have committed a serious crime, but in whose case it was their first offence. I think we ought, in the administration of the law, to do justice to the ideal of mercy as well as to the ideal of justice, and without at all trying to pamper the prisoners, to give a chance of redemption to every man for whom redemption is possible. I would call attention to the matter of unemployment. There are a number of people now in very grave concern through unemployment, in particular necessitous areas in Scotland. On page 91 of the Report there is this case:Age 27 Offence—drawing relief when employed. Sentence 30 days. One previous conviction for loitering in street. Father a hole-borer. English. Mother Irish. Prisoner born in Scotland. Father once in prison for assault on wife. Separated for 10 years. Both alive. Mother respectable; never in prison. Father was a Protestant, but adopted wife's religion, Roman Catholic, on marriage. Father never goes to chapel. Mother goes regularly Prisoner is of fair education. Attended Sunday school until 14 and has always gone to chapel. Riveter by trade. Had been employed fairly regularly until 18 months ago. Has had unemployment benefit and parish relief. Was working and drawing relief—hence conviction. Married; wife respectable; two children. Neither wife nor he touches drink. Anxious to get regular work but cannot. Active and intelligent.That does seem to me a case which calls for attention from the Committee. Thirty days for that conviction does seem excessive, and I should like to know whether cases of that kind, when they come out of gaol, are regularly followed up, so that a man of that kind may be 661 given a chance, instead of being stamped with the terrible title of gaol-bird. There is no question whatever that is very hard indeed for men who have exceeded their benefit under the Unemployment Acts, and who are not drawing parish relief sufficient to keep them, to resist temptations of that kind.
In regard to what the hon. Member for Bridgeton said about the question of short sentences, I would say that the need for these is shown by the splendid work adopted in some cases in regard to the juveniles. I note with great pleasure the course of special lectures given in one institution. There is not time to go into details, although, as a matter of fact, those who take the trouble to read this report will find it of very great interest. But with regard to short sentences, it does seem that these opportunities are only too fleeting for those who are condemned to those institutions, and that where the offence is such that a short sentence is suitable, there should be some alternative way of dealing with these first offenders.
Mr. W. ADAMSON
In addition to the verve interesting general points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgeton regarding the question of prison administration, as well as the points raised by the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown), there is one class of person I would like to bring before the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland before he rises to reply to the points that have been already put to him. The class of prisoner to which I want to draw his attention are the men who are in prison due to the occurrences which happened in the course of the coal stoppage of last year. Those men are not in prison for the ordinary criminal offences. They are there because they acted on the spur of the moment during the course of the stoppage, when, as everyone knows very well, feelings run high and acts are sometimes committed which men would not commit in their calmer moments. They are in prison, in some cases for very substantial periods. I have already taken an opportunity of bringing before the Secretary of State and the Permanent Under-Secretary of his Department a number of cases such as I have been outlining. I have two lists of them before me as I speak. One of them is a case of 18 men who were 662 imprisoned on the 25th March last for taking part in a riot that occurred at Bowhill Colliery. They were sentenced at the Sheriff Court at Dunfermline, and their sentences ranged from two months to eight months. Most of the men were sentenced for periods ranging from two to four months, and, as the Lord Advocate has already pointed out, there are a number of them whose sentences have expired, and, as far as my information goes, only seven of the men sentenced to eight months, six months and four months remain in prison.
§ 8.0 p.m.
§ The CHAIRMAN
I am not quite clear what the right hon. Gentleman means. If he is arguing that these men should have special facilities and that they should not be treated like ordinary criminals, I think that would be in order on this Vote. But, if he is asking that the sentences should be remitted, that would not be in order.
§ Mr. MAXTON
On that point of Order. In the Report of the Prison Commissioners, which I understand is under discussion, quite legitimately, on this particular Vote, reference is definitely made to the effect of the coal stoppage in increasing the number in the Scottish prisons this year as compared with last year. In view of that fact, I would respectfully submit that the question of whether they should continue to remain in prison or be released is quite a fit subject for discussion on this particular Vote.
§ The CHAIRMAN
It is not so much a question of how they came to be there as to how they are to be treated when they are there. It would be perfectly in order to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland or the Lord Advocate that they should have better treatment as what is called "first-class misdemeanants" or something of that sort. But I do not think it would be possible to go into the question of the total remission of their sentences. That perhaps might be done on the Law Vote or on the Vote for the salary of the Lord Advocate. If I allowed a discussion of this sort on this Vote, it would only be another step to the discussion of the justice of the sentences.
I looked up all the Votes before I rose to take part in the discussion and I looked to see on which 663 Vote it would be better for me to raise the matter that I wanted to raise, and, as there were more aspects of the case than the one that you have mentioned that I wanted to be able to put to the Secretary of State for Scotland, I thought it would be better to do it on this Vote and while I was doing it to put the whole of the points that I wanted to put to him and finish with them rather than divide my questions on two Votes. The point that I wanted to put to the Secretary of State for Scotland was that I thought that in these types of cases the ends of justice would be met by smaller sentences than have been passed in the particular list that I have before me.
§ The CHAIRMAN
I am afraid that would be opening a very wide door for discussion about criminal justice altogether. It would be in order on the Vote for Law and Justice or perhaps on the Vote for the Lord Advocate's salary, but I think the Prison Commissioners have no jurisdiction whatsoever as to sentences. Their jurisdiction is only as to the treatment of prisoners who are in gaol.
§ Mr. WILLIAM GRAHAM
May I, on that point of Order, with great respect, suggest that, unless I am wrong, when a person is convicted he passes from the jurisdiction of the Lord Advocate altogether and the problem is one entirely for the Secretary of State for Scotland, or very largely for the Secretary of State for Scotland. I understand that these are convicted prisoners and the only suggestion I rise with respect to offer is that, if by an agreement among ourselves, we were to have a discussion upon this it would be very much easier than to confine the problem to the Report of the Scottish Prison Commissioners and try to leave the rest to the discussion on the Vote for the salary of the Secretary of State for Scotland. I think a division of that kind would be very difficult and, accordingly, the proposal I would respectfully submit is that we might by agreement take these matters in the form which my right hon. Friend proposes to take them as the only way in which we can properly discuss these problems tonight.
§ The LORD ADVOCATE
May I point out that the question of the remission or reduction of these sentences is a matter for the Royal clemency and is not one which can be raised here, although it lies within the power of my right hon. Friend to advise as to its exercise.
§ Mr. MAXTON
Further on the point of Order. There is a definite paragraph in the Report here which says that the total number of prisoners received for offences arising out of the coal dispute is 661. Of these, 377 were re-admitted to prison after conviction. That is increasing the bill for the number for the whole year to the extent of 73. While it is true that it would not be within the scope of this discussion to suggest that the Royal prerogative should be used in any one or all of these cases, it is within the province of my right hon. Friend to argue that, if these people were not detained in prison, the expenses of the Scottish prison administration would be considerably less.
§ The CHAIRMAN
I think, if I were once to admit a discussion on that point. it would be opening a very wide vista of possibilities. I am afraid I must adhere to my ruling, but, if there be serious interest taken in this matter, if hon. Members will consult me as to which Vote it can be raised on, perhaps it might be possible to find time for it next week. I am pretty clear that it cannot come on the question of the advice that might be given to His Majesty. It cannot be raised here. If that were discussed in Committee of Supply at all, it could not come under the Vote for Prison Commissioners.
If that be your ruling, Mr. Hope, I will, of course, respectfully bow to it. I had thought that this Vote would have afforded an opportunity for the discussion of this matter. I can assure you that it world not have taken me a very great length of time to have discussed all the points I wish to put forward.
§ The CHAIRMAN
I am quite sure that the right hon. Gentleman is the last person who would wish to offend against the Rules of Order, but, all the same, I have to think of precedents and of the Rules of the House. Possibly the House may regard them as too severe, but so long as they exist I am afraid I must enforce them.
If I am not to be permitted to finish my points on this Vote, I shall have to defer the discussion until some other suitable occasion.
§ Sir J. GILMOUR
The hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) who opened the Debate on this subject asked me if I would inform him what the effect of legalised cells had been, and he was anxious to know how far the circumstances under which those cells were operated were to the benefit of the inmates. So far as we have dealt with this problem since the passage of the 1926 Act, only one place has been scheduled as legalised cells for sentences of 30 days. That was at Stornoway. That, as the hon. Member is aware, is an area remotely removed from the ordinary circumstances. In addition to that, I would add that, of course, the actual cells are in the old prison so that, in effect, the circumstances are absolutely similar to those we had existing in that area, and in practice it is really only legalising the use of past prisons which had been vacated. In those circumstances, I think he may be satisfied that this problem is being dealt with carefully. I would only add that it is not the intention of myself or, indeed, of my Office that this should be extended broadcast. It can only be done with the greatest care.
Comment was made upon the fact that there were a certain number of short sentences, and objection was raised to certain individuals being sent to prison for short periods. I do not know what real alternative there is to offer for a correction which, while it may have its difficulties, is, in the main, at any rate, so far as we have been able to see, the only possible method of dealing with certain classes of crime. Reference has been made, of course, to the possibility of extending probation. I am in favour of probation if I could find a satisfactory method of carrying it out, but all I can say to-day is that we have got a committee sitting at present considering the problem, particularly of young offenders, and until we have in our hands that Report and any recommendation which the committee may make, it would be premature to ask us to make any declaration.
§ Sir J. GILMOUR
Yes, I think it is approaching a finish, but, if the hon. Gentleman will put down a question on that matter, I will endeavour to ascertain the facts. It is, however, clear that these matters are being given careful consideration. In addition to that, I have, so far as it has been possible, endeavoured to extend that system. It was a system in which my right hon. Friend who was previously upon the Front Bench and previously in the Scottish Office took a considerable interest. The real problem and difficulty, as I see it, is to find suitable probation officers and to get those in the locality, responsible people, to take a real and active interest in these young people. It is not really sufficient to make a nominal supervision, because by that means they slide back into the same courses. In those circumstances, it is a matter of considerable difficulty to find suitable supervision, and effective supervision which will really deter and in many cases assist in the re-establishment of people who have fallen into crime.
With regard to the actual conduct of these prisons, I think that we are making some progress. The hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) asked me some questions about Peterhead. Peterhead is, as hon. Members know, a penal prison, and only those go to that prison who are sentenced to penal servitude. Even there we are making what one might describe as very humane experiments, in so far as giving greater latitude for conversation and meals is concerned, and we are endeavouring, by every means in our power, while carrying out properly and fairly the restrictive measures which are necessary, to build up and strengthen the character of these men, so that when they come out again they may have a better chance. Reference has been made to the amount of the gratuity which may be earned by earned by good marks. It may seem that the amounts which can be earned are small in themselves, but, while I am quite willing to investigate that point, what is far more essential and practical, in my view, than increasing to any great amount the money which the individual has in his hands when he goes, is to see if it is possible, by co-operation with 667 outside bodies—and this is work in which I know the Prison Commissioners are taking an active interest—to find jobs and places for these people when they come out into the outer world.
§ Mr. MAXTON
I was not suggesting for a moment that an increased gratuity should be an alternative to care; I was suggesting it as something additional.
§ Sir J. GILMOUR
I do not think that any scheme of that kind which could be devised would materially assist these individuals, and, if the gratuity were increased to a considerable sum, it might even have a very detrimental effect. The fact of a man being launched out with money in his hands after he has been for a long perīod denied it, is just the kind of thing which often leads to his renewed downfall rather than to his improvement.
§ Mr. MAXTON
I am very keen about this problem, and the right hon. Gentleman must be aware that, in any case in which the Prison Commissioners are in doubt as to the capacity of the prisoner to use his 5s. properly and economically, it is paid to him through the Prisoners' Aid Society in smaller instalments, so that the point which the right hon. Gentleman is making does not really arise. Surely, the prospect that a man would have sufficient to pay for his lunch and bed on the first night when he comes out is not going to encourage people to be lawbreakers.
§ Sir J. GILMOUR
I am quite willing to consider the suggestion, the hon. Member's interest in which I realize; but, as I have said, I think that a far more practical method of dealing with these individuals would be on the lines I have suggested.
§ Sir J. GILMOUR
The Prison Commissioners are in close touch with the Prisoners' Aid Society and a variety of other societies, and they take every means in their power to help these men and women when they come out of restraint. Of course, one is painfully aware of the difficulties, particularly in dealing with the younger people who come under the law, but we are making 668 increased endeavours, not only to interest them in work while they are under restraint, but to train them in work which will be of value and interest to them when they come out into the outer world. While we may in Scotland admittedly lag behind England with regard to the problem of probation, yet, as I have indicated, it is a problem which we are investigating, and in regard to which I hope we may make progress. On the other hand, I think we can justly claim that the prison administration, and particularly the new prison at Edinburgh, is a great advance on anything that we have seen in the prison world in the past. It is with an earnest endeavour to see the law carried out and properly administered, but at the same time to make these men useful while they are under restraint and to give them an opportunity of facing the world again, that the Prison Commissioners are carrying out at the present time what I believe to be a progressive policy. Reference has been made to lectures which are given. That is a matter which I think can be progressively pursued. The choice of subjects and the class of teacher employed, particularly in helping the boys and young men, are matters of the greatest importance. In that we are taking an increasing and, I hope, progressive interest, and I trust that it will be found that, while we still have a regrettably large number in our prisons, yet we are on a hopeful course of decrease and, at the same time, of more humane methods.
§ Mr. E. BROWN
Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us anything about the men who were committed during the coal dispute? I think there were 661. Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many are still in prison?
§ Mr. BUCHANAN
Will not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider those 21 cases, and, now that all the bitterness has died down, release them?
§ Mr. MAXTON
I beg to move to reduce the Vote by £100.
669 I move this reduction on the ground that the Prisons Estimate for Scotland is unduly large, owing to the unnecessary incarceration of certain miners because of matters arising out of the coal dispute.
§ Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £86,053, be granted for the said Service."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 78; Noes, 165.671
|Division No. 281.]||AYES.||[8.24 p.m.|
|Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)||Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)||Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)|
|Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')||Grundy, T. W.||Shepherd, Arthur Lewis|
|Ammon, Charles George||Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)||Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)|
|Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)||Hardie, George D.||Sitch, Charles H.|
|Baker, Walter||Hayes, John Henry||Slesser, Sir Henry H.|
|Batey, Joseph||Henderson, T. (Glasgow)||Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)|
|Beckett, John (Gateshead)||Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)||Smith, Rennie (Penistone)|
|Bondfield, Margaret||Johnston, Thomas(Dundee)||Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip|
|Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.||Kelly, W. T.||Stamford, T. W.|
|Brown, Ernest (Leith)||Kennedy, T.||Stephen, Campbell|
|Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)||Kirkwood, D.||Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)|
|Buchanan, G.||Lansbury, George||Sullivan, Joseph|
|Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel||Lawrence, Susan||Sutton, J E.|
|Charleton, H. C.||Lee, F.||Taylor, R. A.|
|Clowes, S.||Lindley, F. W.||Thurtle, Ernest|
|Compton, Joseph||Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)||Tinker, John Joseph|
|Connolly, M.||Maxton, James||Viant, S. P.|
|Day, Colonel Harry||Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)||Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)|
|Duncan, C.||Murnin, H.||Wellock, Wilfred|
|Dunnico, H.||Paling, W.||Welsh, J. C.|
|Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)||Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)||Westwood, J.|
|Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)||Riley, Ben||Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)|
|Forrest, W.||Ritson, J.||Windsor, Walter|
|Gardner, J. P.||Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)||Young, Robert(Lancaster, Newton)|
|Gibbins, Joseph||Rose, Frank H.|
|Gillett, George M.||Salter, Dr. Alfred||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|Graham, D, M. (Lanark, Hamilton)||Scurr, John||Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr.|
|Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.||Davies, Sir Thomas(Cirencester)||King, Commodore Henry Douglas|
|Ainsworth, Major Charles||Davies, Dr. Vernon||Knox, Sir Alfred|
|Albery, Irving James||Dawson, Sir Philip||Lamb, J. Q.|
|Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)||Dixey, A. C.||Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.|
|Alexander, sir Wm, (Glasgow, Cent'l)||Edmondson, Major A. J.||Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip|
|Allen, J. Sandeman(L'pool, W. Derby)||Eillot, Major Walter E.||Little, Dr. E. Graham|
|Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.||Elveden, Viscount||Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)|
|Barclay-Harvey, C. M.||Fairfax, Captain J. G.||Long, Major Eric|
|Barnett, Major Sir Richard||Fanshawe, Captain G. D.||Looker, Herbert William|
|Barnston, Major Sir Harry||Fielden, E. B.||Lougher, Lewis|
|Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.||Finburgh, S.||Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere|
|Bethel, A.||Ford, Sir P. J.||Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman|
|Betterton, Henry B.||Forestier-Walker, Sir L.||MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen|
|Bourne, Captain Robert Croft||Foxcroft, Captain C. T.||Maclntyre, Ian|
|Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.||Galbraith, J. F. W.||Macmillan, Captain H.|
|Brittain, Sir Harry||Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John||McNeill Rt. Hon. Ronald John|
|Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.||Grenfell, Edward C.(City of London)||Macquisten, F. A.|
|Broun-Lindsay, Major H||Hacking, Captain Douglas H.||Makins, Brigadier-General E.|
|Buchan, John||Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)||Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn|
|Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James||Hanbury, C.||Margesson, captain D.|
|Burman, J. B.||Harland, A.||Meller, R. J.|
|Burton, Colonel H. W.||Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)||Merriman, F. B.|
|Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward||Hawke, John Anthony||Meyer, Sir Frank|
|Campbell, E. T.||Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)||Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)|
|Cassels, J. D.||Henn, Sir Sydney H.||Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.|
|Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton||Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.||Murchison, sir Kenneth|
|Charteris, Brigadier-General J.||Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)||Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph|
|Clayton, G. C.||Hills, Major John Waller||Nelson, Sir Frank|
|Cobb, Sir Cyril||Hilton, Cecil||Newman, sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)|
|Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.||Holt, Captain H. P.||Nicholson, O. (Westminster)|
|Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George||Hopkins, J. W. W.||Oman, Sir Charles William C.|
|Colfox, Major William Phillips||Horlick, Lieut-Colonel J. N.||Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William|
|Conway, Sir W. Martin||Howard-Bury, Lieut-Colonel C. K.||Perkins, Colonel E. K.|
|Couper, J. B.||Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer||Perring, Sir William George|
|Courtauld, Major J. S.||Huntingfield, Lord||Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)|
|Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry(Islington, N.)||Hurd, Percy A.||Preston, William|
|Craig, Sir Ernest(Chester, Crewe)||Hurst, Gerald B.||Radford, E. A.|
|Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)||Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.||Raine, Sir Walter|
|Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)||James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert||Ramsden, E.|
|Cunliffe, Sir Herbert||Jephcott, A. R.||Remer, J. R.|
|Dalkeith, Earl of||Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)||Rice, Sir Frederick|
|Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.||Kidd, J. (Linilthgow)||Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)|
|Ropner, Major L.||Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'oland)||Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.|
|Rye, F. G.||Streatfeild, Captain S. R.||Waterhouse, Captain Charles|
|Salmon, Major I.||Styles, Captain H. W.||Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)|
|Sandeman, N. Stewart||Sugden, Sir Wilfrid||Wells, S. R.|
|Sanders, Sir Robert A.||Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.||Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)|
|Sanderson, Sir Frank||Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)||Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)|
|Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)||Thompson, Luke(Sunderland)||Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)|
|Shepperson, E. W.||Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)||Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Llchfield)|
|Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)||Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-||Windsor-Clive, Lieut. -Colonel George|
|Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)||Tinne, J. A.||Wise, Sir fredric|
|Slaney, Major P. Kenyon||Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement||Withers, John James|
|Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dlne, C.)||Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough|
|Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)||Waddington, R.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.||Wallace, Captain D. E.||Major Cope and Mr. Penny|
Bill read a Second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House for To-morrow.—[Mr. McNeill.]