HC Deb 12 July 1938 vol 338 c1088
11. Captain Cunningham-Reid

asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the ruling by a senior Metropolitan stipendiary magistrate that an Army officer giving evidence in a court of law should not wear a sword; and whether, as the King's Regulations and dress regulations for the Army do not deal specifically with this point, he will amend them in this particular.

Mr. Hore-Belisha

Paragraph 977, King's Regulations, requires uniform to be worn by all ranks when on duty. An officer detailed to attend a court of law is on duty, and in such circumstances he is bound to attend in military uniform, of which his sword forms a part. Its removal from the military point of view would be an act of discourtesy. Instructions have recently been issued for the guidance of military authorities in regard to the application of these regulations to the particular case of an officer detailed to attend a court of law.

Mr. Kirkwood

Is the Minister aware that a sword is an implement to wound or take life? What use can a sword, therefore, be in a court of law? If an Army officer wishes to attend here in uniform, he can do so, but he must not wear a sword.

Mr. Hore-Belisha

It is a long time since a sword in this country was used to wound anybody. I think speech more often wounds.

Mr. Kirkwood

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of my question? An officer who is a Member of this House may attend this House in uniform, but he must not wear a sword.

Mr. Hore-Belisha

The Serjeant-at-Arms in this House wears a sword.

Mr. MacGovern

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that swords are frequently used in Glasgow by religious factionists?