§ 21 Mr. Coldrickasked the Secretary of State for War (1) why the inquiry into the death of 23126898 Royston Love, of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, was held in secret; and why the father was not informed that the inquiry was taking place;
(2) why the father of 23126898 Royston Love, of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, was not invited to attend the inquiry into the death of his son;
(3) why the father of 23126898 Royston Love, of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, was not informed of the result of the inquiry into the death of his son.
§ Mr. HeadAs my hon. Friend explained in his letter of 14th June to the hon. Member, no court of inquiry was held following the death of Private Love. This was because it is not the practice to hold a court of inquiry when death is shown to be due to known natural causes and is confirmed by post-mortem examination, as was the case on this occasion. A special investigation was made at my request in the light of the hon. Member's reports to me. The results of the investigation made were notified to the hon. Member in the usual way and not direct to Mr. Love.
§ Mr. ColdrickIf no inquiry was held, why should Colonel Hughes have made a statement to a prominent newspaper that one had been held, and thereby cause a great deal of anxiety? Secondly, having regard to the evidence which has been supplied by the father of Private Love concerning either the criminal negligence or gross incompetence of the medical officer, does the Minister not now think that in these circumstances he ought to hold a real inquiry into the death of this young man?
§ Mr. HeadI have seen the hon. Member's letters and I have seen what Mr. Love said, from which I have not been able to find any particular new piece of evidence. If, however, the hon. Member or Mr. Love likes to inform me of any particular thing, I will certainly have it gone into.
§ Mr. ColdrickIs the Minister not aware that, according to the statement of Mr. Love, who saw the boy on the 20th of 180 the month, the now deceased son reported that he had himself seen the medical officer on 20th April, but that according to the replies I have received from the right hon. Gentleman he says that he had not seen him until the 21st, that even on the 21st he accused the boy of malingering, and that it was the sergeant major who gave the boy authorisation to go to bed, which led to his ultimate decease? In the circumstances, I am positive that, having regard to the anxiety that is felt in Bristol, it would be advisable to have a complete inquiry into this matter.
§ Mr. HeadWe have had a very close investigation into this case. I am satisfied that the question of malingering was not gone into. The unfortunate thing was that the boy had a hernia in exactly the same area as his suspected appendicitis, and the subsequent diagnosis was quickly made. If the hon. Member has any particular aspect that he would like me to go into further, however, I do not want to cover anything up and am quite prepared to reopen the case and go into it further, if he wishes.