§ Mr. J. Hall
asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the case of two men who, at the West London police court on 27th September, 1938, were charged with stealing bags of flour, when one of them was sentenced to three months' hard labour but was released on appeal, while the other was remanded in custody but subsequently granted a free pardon; and whether, seeing that these men were incarcerated for 15 and 14 days, respectively, he will recommend that compensation be granted to them in view of the ignominy and loss of wages which they have suffered?
§ Sir S. Hoare
I recommended a free pardon because, the two men having been convicted of a joint offence and the conviction of one of them having been quashed on appeal, it was equitable to cancel the conviction of the other who had not appealed; but apart from this circumstance there is nothing to differentiate this case from others in which convictions are quashed on appeal, and there were no grounds for any payment from public funds.