§ 55 and 56. Mr. Hector Hughesasked the Minister of Defence (1) how many of those members of His Majesty's Forces now in prison were sentenced for crimes of turpitude; and how many for Forces offences; how many of these offences were proved to have been caused by or related to domestic trouble in the lives of the offenders; and if he will now take steps to review such cases;
(2) If he will now reconsider and differentiate the cases of members of His Majesty's Forces sentenced for crimes of turpitude from those sentenced for Forces offences, during the war and since by courts martial; and if he will now take steps to provide an amnesty in suitable cases, so that as many as possible of those persons may be restored either to the Forces or to civil employment.
§ Mr. ShinwellI regret that the figures for which my hon. and learned Friend asks could not be made available without undue labour. I can, however, assure 399 him that all sentences awarded by courts-martial, whether of imprisonment or detention and whether for Service or other types of offences, are systematically reviewed and frequently reduced or suspended as a matter of normal Service procedure. He can also be assured that any extenuating domestic circumstances are taken into account both by courts-martial and by those whose duty it is subsequently to confirm or review their sentences. In these circumstances, I see no grounds for further action on the lines suggested.
§ Mr. HughesWith regard to the answer to Question No. 56, does my right hon. Friend remember the Army (Suspension of Sentences) Act, 1915, which authorised the suspension of sentences of penal servitude and imprisonment passed on soldiers during the First World War; and would he consider attempting to solve the present problem by some similar means?
§ Mr. ShinwellYes, Sir, I am aware of the existence of that Act, but the provisions were purely permissive; in fact, to a very large extent what was contained in that Act is put into practice.