HC Deb 23 November 1933 vol 283 cc266-7
51. Mr. McGOVERN

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the alleged confession of Lieutenant Baillie-Stewart was volunteered by himself; if it is in his own handwriting; if signed by him; when it was made and to whom it was made; if it was witnessed and the name or names of witnesses; and can he state his reasons for refusing to allow this confession to be inspected by the hon. Member for Shettleston?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Duff Cooper)

The confession made by Mr. Baillie-Stewart soon after his conviction was volunteered by himself, was initialed by him on each page and signed by him at the end. It was made to a representative of the War Office, and was witnessed by the Governor of the prison. As regards the last part of the question, my Noble Friend the Secretary of State has decided that the document contains information which it is not in the public interest to disclose.

Mr. McGOVERN

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in a letter sent from prison which appears in the Press to-day, Mr. Baillie-Stewart states that when he made the statement after the trial he was in a state of mental and physical collapse? He cannot even now remember the story that he invented, but he was induced to do so because he was promised his release, and, in view of the contradictions which are in evidence to-day, is it not more than ever necessary that some searching committee of inquiry should be set up in order to get at the complete truth of the situation?

Mr. COOPER

If the statement is made that he was induced to make a confession by a promise that he would be released, there is no truth whatever in that statement. There are no contradictions in the facts which have come forward, no new evidence has been produced, and there is no reason whatever why the case should be reopened.

Mr. McGOVERN

Has the hon. Gentleman seen the letter in which Mr. Baillie-Stewart states that the Army Council promised through their representatives to consider his release if he made a confession, and, in view of that statement, which must have passed through the hands of the authorities, does he not think that action is necessary to clear up the entire matter? Surely the War Office has nothing to lose by a complete disclosure in this case?

Mr. COOPER

I think it is unnecessary to repeat that that statement of Mr. Baillie-Stewart, if made, is absolutely untrue.

Forward to