HC Deb 04 October 1944 vol 403 cc914-5
24. Mr. Arthur Duckworth

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether No. D/JX287308, Able Seaman L. C. Hale, was under the ship's doctor at the time when he left his ship in May, 1944; and why Able Seaman Hale was sentenced to 42 days' detention for the offence of desertion after being treated as a mental case for several weeks both in the Royal Salop Infirmary and elsewhere and in view of the opinions of the doctors who first examined him when he arrived at Shrewsbury and the length of time which finally elapsed before disciplinary action was taken against him.

Mr. Alexander

From the entries in this rating's medical history it appears that he was not under the ship's doctor when he deserted from his ship. Both the naval hospital where he was subsequently treated and the psychiatrist who re-examined him after he arrived at the barracks reported on his mental condition and considered that he was responsible for his actions at the time of his desertion, and the psychiatrist recommended that there should be no interference with the usual disciplinary action. In these circumstances the rating was sentenced to 42 days' detention for the serious offence of deserting from his ship. The fact that this man was required to undergo medical treatment for some weeks after his desertion did not, of course, make it possible to ignore his offence.

Mr. Duckworth

Is not a matter of principle involved here? If this man was not a medical case, why was he not arrested and taken straight back to his ship? What justice can there be in taking disciplinary action against him weeks after he had arrived home, and had been given medical treatment for a number of weeks?

Mr. Alexander

I do not think a question of principle arises, because the officer responsible for exercising disciplinary action took no action against the man for the offence until he had taken advice from the naval hospital, and the psychiatrist who specially examined him, as to whether he was or was not responsible for his desertion.

Mr. McGovern

Is great care taken in such cases as this to see that men are not suffering from strain or mental trouble before or even after court-martial?

Mr. Alexander

I say frankly that I am glad this case has been brought to my notice because I want to advise the people concerned to be careful about these cases and consider them as sympathetically as possible.

Mr. Silverman

Is it not obvious that if a man deserted, and it was found necessary to treat him immediately afterwards for a considerable period in a mental hospital, he should not have been detained for 42 days?

Mr. Alexander

I have given the House the facts as they are.

Mr. Duckworth

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.