§ 36 and 37. Mr. Hector Hughesasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, (1) how, and by whom, on or before Sunday last, the date of the forthcoming release of a man of whose 1332 name he has been informed, who had purged his offence, was disclosed to the Press; and if he will inquire into the matter;
(2) if he will take steps to protect convicted persons, who have purged their offences, from the injustice inflicted on them by the disclosure of the time of their forthcoming release from prison and the publication of their names, circumstances of conviction and other details which hold them up to public obloquy and prejudice their rehabilitation as useful citizens.
§ Mr. EdeI share the view of my hon. and learned Friend as to the undesirability of publicity of this kind, and I believe that the great majority of newspapers recognise the considerations to which he calls attention and avoid publication of such information. As regards the particular case he mentions, I do not know how the Press obtained its information, but I am satisfied as a result of inquiry that the prison authorities were not in any way responsible. Every care is taken by the prison authorities to see that prisoners are discharged in circumstances which will avoid undesirable publicity.
§ Mr. HughesWould my right hon. Friend consider, in conjunction with the Attorney-General, whether the law of criminal libel could not be invoked in order to punish and restrain that very small section of the Press that acts in this snooping unconscionable and disreputable manner?
§ Mr. EdeI am very 10th to take steps that would appear to interfere with the freedom of the Press. I believe that the good sense of the community will, in the long run, sufficiently repudiate the few who are guilty of cases of the kind to which my hon. and learned Friend has drawn attention.