§ 29. Mr. T. Williamsasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that when F. Preston, of Scarborough, was convicted at Leeds Assizes in 1938, he was denied access to hundreds of documents which had been concealed by the police; that his offices had been raided and 2071 diaries and books mutilated and whole pages removed therefrom; that witnesses were intimidated and suborned by the police before and after the trial at Leeds and that one or more witnesses have signed a statement to that effect; and, in view of the fact that witnesses now admit they were induced to commit perjury, will he insist upon a full impartial inquiry into all the facts of this case?
§ Sir J. AndersonThe hon. Member wrote to my predecessor in office about this case and was informed that there was no foundation for the allegations that Preston was denied access to documents or that documents were mutilated by the police or that witnesses were intimated by the police. The allegation that witnesses now admit they were induced to commit perjury is new. Neither the Home Office nor the police know of any such admissions, but if the hon. Member will send me particulars I will have inquiry made.
§ Mr. WilliamsThis question was put down in July to enable the Home Office to consult the prisoner, who is now in possession of the documents previously withheld, and does not the right hon. Gentleman think, in view of the statement that at least one or more witnesses have signed affidavits to the effect mentioned in the question, that there ought to be a complete investigation into the whole of the circumstances of the case?
§ Sir J. AndersonA great mass of documents, including petitions from the prisoner, has been carefully examined in the Department, and the reply I have given is based upon the result of that examination. There is nothing I can add to the reply, but if the hon. Gentleman has any further evidence I shall be glad to consider it.
§ Mr. WilliamsDo I understand from the right hon. Gentleman's reply that if any document such as the one referred to in the question can be provided he will undertake to have a further investigation?
§ Sir J. AndersonI will certainly do so, but the papers have been looked through, and I have been unable to find anything corresponding to the document mentioned by the hon. Member.