HC Deb 16 April 1940 vol 359 cc773-5
18. Mr. McGovern

asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the arrest of a conscientious objector, Kenneth Makin, who was court-martialled at Dalkeith training centre on 12th March for refusing to obey orders, was sentenced to 60 days' imprisonment, taken to Barlinnie Prison under the military authorities, where he was forcibly stripped in his cell on 17th March and offered uniform; that he was forcibly dressed in uniform on three successive occasions on 18th March, when two sergeants used violence, pulling and screwing his hair, catching him by the neck and nearly choking him; that he was left from the 21st to the 25th with only his underwear on; given bread and water twice each day from 18th to 21st March; was removed to Edinburgh Castle hospital on the 26th with nervous trouble, violent pains and threatened pneumonia, where he was interviewed by the Member for Shettleston on 8th April; what he intends to do in this case where the young man has Christian objections to war; and whether he will end this treatment?

Mr. Stanley

This soldier was court-martialled for wilful defiance of orders, and was sentenced to 60 days' detention, not imprisonment. The sentence was commuted to 14 days' detention. He was sent to the military detention barracks at Barlinnie on 14th March, and stripped voluntarily on arrival for inspection by the medical officer. At no time was any violence used for dressing or undressing. On 18th March, he was charged before the commandant with disobedience of orders, namely, refusing to put on uniform, and was sentenced to a three days' diet of bread and water, which is in accordance with regulations. On 25th March, he was discharged from the detention barracks, and escorted to his unit in civilian clothes, having first been passed fit by the medical officer, and having also stated that he had no complaint to make as to his treatment. On 26th March, he was admitted to Edinburgh Hospital, suffering from lumbago and a slight chill. On 10th April, he was discharged from hospital, and on 11th April he was found fit for duty. I see no reason for intervention.

Mr. McGovern

I want to know what the right hon. Gentleman disputes. Does he dispute that this man was left for three days in his underwear and that he was given bread and water for three days? I do not dispute that we have heard the report which the right hon. Gentleman received, but I would point out that my information is from the man, and that I accept it. I want to know whether this man's treatment was not contrary to the whole spirit of the Act, in relation to which it was understood in this House that a man so charged would be given not less than three months' imprisonment, following which he would be placed in a civil prison. Is not Barlinnie Prison a criminal prison?

Mr. Stanley

This man appeared before both the local and the appellate tribunals, and although his claim was refused in each case, he was placed in the Royal Army Medical Corps, where he refused an order. It has been made public that, where a sentence of three months imprisonment has been served, an appeal can be made to the appellate tribunal, but, of course, I am not in a position—I should not think it right—to make orders to courts-martial that they were to give sentences which they did not consider to be in consonance with the gravity of the particular offence with which a man was charged.

Mr. Creech Jones

Will the right hon. Gentleman cause careful inquiry to be made into the treatment of this man during the time of his detention in prison? Will he also consider whether the procedure might be changed so that a man who is obviously a conscientious objector might be sent to a civil prison and be sentenced for a period of three months, in order that he could have the benefit of Section 13 of the Military Service Act?

Mr. Stanley

The effect of the three months' sentence has been brought to the notice of courts-martial, but I cannot order a court-martial to give a man a sentence that it thinks is not the proper one for the offence with which a man is charged.

Mr. H. Morrison

Is it not clear that the tribunal and the appellate tribunal may have made a mistake in their decisions, and can the right hon. Gentleman not cause the case to be re-heard?

Mr. Stanley

I would point out not only that the local and the appellate tribunals heard this case, but that the man has been put in the R.A.M.C.

Mr. Maxton

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that this man has a religious and not a political objection and that he will never make a soldier; and would he permit my hon. Friend and myself to give him some more private information?

Mr. Stanley

Obviously, I am always ready to do this, if any hon. Member wishes to give me information upon any particular case, but I have made very careful inquiry into this case, and I have given the House the results of it.

Major-General Sir Alfred Knox

As this man was put into the Royal Army Medical Corps, is it not obvious that there was no idea at all of making a soldier of him?