43 and 44. Lieut.-Colonel Sir William Allen
asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether the commander-in-chief, India, when granting confirmation of the proceedings of the general court-martial, held at Quetta on 8th January, 1934, for the trial of Major Sandford, R.E., had before him the original record of the proceedings in the handwriting of the Judge Advocate of the court;
(2) whether the proceedings of the general court-martial held at Quetta on the 8th January, 1934, for the trial of Major Sandford, R.E., which are presumably in the custody of the Judge Advocate-General, are the original record of the court in the handwriting of the Judge Advocate as taken down by him at the trial in accordance with Rule of Procedure No. 94?
The proceedings of the general court-martial referred to, which are now in the custody of the Judge 173 Advocate-General and were before the commander-in-chief in India at the time of confirmation by him, are, although typewritten and not in the handwriting of the Judge Advocate, the original proceedings of the trial within the meaning of the Army Act and Rules of Procedure, being properly signed by the Judge Advocate as responsible for their accuracy and duly authenticated by the signature of the President of the Court, in accordance with that Act and those Rules. Rule of Procedure 94 does not require that the original proceedings shall be in the handwriting of the Judge Advocate.
§ Sir W. Allen
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is not aware that the original proceedings at the court-martial were, in accordance with Rule 94, written in the handwriting of the Judge Advocate at the trial and were accepted there as the original proceedings; were these proceedings not re-copied in his own handwriting, and was not a third edition typed; and will the right hon. Gentleman say by what authority the president of the court-martial signed such a copy without initialling the alterations and without the assent of the accused according to Rule of Procedure No. 100?
I understand that the original copy was re-copied and then typed out for greater accuracy, and signed by the president of the court. I do not think that that is an unusual procedure.
§ Sir W. Allen
Does not the right hon. Gentleman understand that, according to the Rules of Procedure, the president must initial any alterations that there may be from the original? I beg to give notice that on the introduction of the Army Estimates I will call attention to the court-martial of Major Sandford, R.E., and move a Resolution.