§ Sir THOMAS ESMONDEasked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if the dismissal of Warder J. J. Sinnott in August last at Hong Kong was considered 216W by the Governor and Council; if Mr. Sinnott was furnished with a statement in writing showing the grounds of his dismissal; if Mr. Sinnott was given an opportunity of stating his case in writing before his dismissal; if Mr. Sinnott was furnished with a copy of the doctor's report and of any other documents upon which his dismissal was founded; if the Colonial Secretary was furnished with a full report of the proceedings in this case; and, if so, upon what date?
§ Colonel SEELYThe case was not considered by the Governor in Council. Warder Sinnott was summarily dismissed, in accordance with prison regulations, for being drunk on duty. He had previously been reduced in rank for a similar offence. So far as I am aware, he was not furnished with a statement in writing showing the grounds of his dismissal, nor invited to state his case in writing; but a full investigation was held by the assistant superintendent of the gaol, and Warder Sinnott had every facility for putting forward his defence. I understand that Warder Sinnott has obtained a copy of the doctor's report. There are no other documents bearing on the case. The Secretary of State received a full report on the case at the beginning of last March. He has carefully investigated the matter, and is satisfied that the dismissal of this warder was fully justified.