§ Mr. SNOWDENasked the Home Secretary how many conscientious objectors are at the present time inmates of the prison hospital at Walton Prison, Liverpool; whether on the 26th April there were twelve of these men in the prison hospital, eleven of whom bad served terms of imprisonment of such length as to entitle them to the special regulations; whether nine of the eleven were considered fit to take exercise daily, but instead of two exercises with conversation to which they were entitled, they were allowed but one, during which conversation was not permitted; whether repeated applications for the administration of the special Regulations have been met by the prison officials, first by stating that such a course would be inimical to hospital discipline, and secondly by offering the complaining prisoners, no matter what their state of health was, the choice of accepting things as they are or going back to hard labour 48W in the prison; and whether he will take steps at once to have the grounds of these complaints removed?
§ Sir G. CAVEThere are now nine persons in the hospital at Liverpool Prison who claim to be conscientious objectors; there were on the 26th April twelve such persons, of whom eleven had served terms of imprisonment sufficient to entitle them to the benefit of the special Regulations. Of these eleven prisoners, nine were considered fit to take exercise, but by the direction of the medical officer were restricted to one exercise daily without conversation. I am informed that any application for further exercise should be made to the Governor. No such application has yet been made.
Mr. CHANCELLORasked the Home Secretary whether conscientious objectors who have served a sentence of two years for refusing, on conscientious grounds, to obey military orders will be discharged at the end of that period without liability to be called up again?
§ Sir G. CAVEEach of these prisoners has the opportunity, if he satisfies the Central Tribunal that he ought to be treated as a conscientious objector, of undertaking non-military work under the Brace Committee and ultimately (if he carries out that work to the satisfaction of the Committee) of procuring his release for work of national importance. Men who refuse to take advantage of the opportunities so offered to them and who continue to break the law must necessarily serve their sentences in prison, and I have no authority to release them from military service; but in the case of those who have been in prison for an aggregate period of twelve months a mitigation of prison conditions under No. 243 a of the Prison Rules has been announced, and I am considering with the Prison Commissioners whether after a further term of imprisonment some further amelioration of the prison conditions can be allowed.
§ Mr. SNOWDENasked the Undersecretary of State for the Home Department why W. E. Chilton, of the works centre, Knutsford, has not been discharged on medical grounds, seeing that he was reported as medically unfit by Dr. Sodden, the medical officer at the Alsop camp, where he was recently employed, and has also been recommended by the medical officer at the works centre at Knutsford for discharge on the ground that he is suffering from an ailment from which he 49W is not likely to recover; and will the question of his discharge be immediately considered?
§ Mr. BRACEInstructions were given on the 25th April to send this man home on sick leave pending the consideration of the question of his discharge. That question is now under consideration by the Committee on Employment of Conscientious Objectors. Meanwhile the man has not availed himself of the sick leave granted him, but it is open to him at any time to do so.
§ Mr. SNOWDENasked the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department why Haydn Geaves, No. 924, Works Centre, Knutsford, who has had eighteen months' service under the scheme and has a good record, has been refused the exceptional employment scheme; and will the decision of the Committee in this case be favourably reconsidered?
§ Mr. BRACEThis man's conduct and industry were not altogether satisfactory, and the decision was postponed. The case will shortly come again under review, but I cannot anticipate the Committee's decision.
§ Mr. SNOWDENasked the Undersecretary of State for the Home Department if the men employed at the works centre, Llangattock, have to commence work at 6.30 in the morning and have before this to walk 1½ miles up the mountain to their work; whether the first break for meals is at 11.30 in the morning, after which work is resumed until 5.30, with the result that the men who are engaged on hard work have one meal only in twelve hours; whether the hours of employment are longer than those usually observed for this kind of work in the district; and whether the general conditions will be made more reasonable?
§ Mr. BRACEThe answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative, but the period of twelve hours referred to by the hon. Member is immediately preceded and immediately followed by a substantial meal. The hours of employment are the same as those observed on these works by the ordinary labour employed there. The general health of this camp is excellent, and I see no ground for any change in the conditions.