Mr. WEIRasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he was aware that Staff-Quartermaster-Sergeant H. B. Stickney, who with his wife and four children left England for South Africa in December last, was, on his arrival in Cape Town placed under arrest for five days by the military embarkation staff officer because he declined to allow the medical officer of the Government transport "Rohilla" to vaccinate his children, nothwith-standing the fact that certificates of exemption from vaccination had been granted in England in respect of the children; whether the whole party prior to leaving England had been certified by Major Boyle, of the Royal Army Medical Corps, to be free from infectious disease and fit to embark for South Africa; would he explain under what authority the officer at Cape Town acted; whether it was the practice of the War Office to ignore certificates of exemption granted under the Vaccination Acts of 1898 and 1907; would he explain under what authority he was informed, on arrival at Tempe on 9th January, by his commanding officer that he would not be allowed to reside in quarters with his wife, and that his children would not be allowed to attend the military school; was he aware that on the 22nd February Sergeant Stickney was arrested for residing with his wife and children at Naval Hill, and on the 8th March tried by district court-martial at Tempe and sentenced to the loss of five years' seniority; would he state why, during the arrest of her husband, Mrs. Stickney and her children were placed under the surveillance of a sentry; was he aware that on the day the district court-martial was pronounced Major Old-field attended at Sergeant Stickney's quarters to remove Mrs. Stickney and her children, when the sergeant then consented to have his children vaccinated by 1805W the Army medical officer; would he state what action he proposed to take in the case; and would Sergeant Stickney be restored the seniority in rank of which he had been deprived?
§ Colonel SEELYThe facts of the case are as follows:—Prior to proceeding to South Africa the Army medical officer at Leeds, acting under paragraph 1,502 King's Regulations, examined Mrs. Stickney and the four children, and on her assertion that they had all been successfully vaccinated, duly certified them fit. Before embarkation it was discovered that Mrs. Stickney's statement was untrue, and that the family had never been vaccinated. Staff Quartermaster-Sergeant Stickney was duly informed that under the Regulations lie could not. take his family unless they were vaccinated, and he then signed a certificate to the effect that he quite understood that he was permitted to embark his children only on condition of his allowing them to be vaccinated on board. This permission was a special concession to Staff Quartermaster-Sergeant Stickney, and was contrary to the Regulations which enjoin vaccination prior to embarkation. On board the transport, when the medical officer directed the children to attend for vaccination Staff Quartermaster-Sergeant Stickney refused to carry out his undertaking. He was accordingly arrested on arriving at Capetown by the general officer commanding there for his conduct in regard to the certificate, but on the case being reported to the general officer commanding in chief he was released without. prejudice to re-arrest under the King's Regulations. On reaching Tempe he deliberately, in defiance of orders, took his family into public quarters. For this ha was tried by court-martial and sentenced to loss of seniority. As, however, the proceedings of the court-martial have been subsequently quashed, owing to technical irregularities, he is now relieved from all consequences of his trial.