HC Deb 13 December 1948 vol 459 cc101-2W
67. Sir J. Mellor

asked the Postmaster-General whether he has considered the observations of Mr. Justice Hallett at Stafford Assizes on 26th November criticising, as an attempt to avoid publicity, his request to the Stourbridge magistrates that they should deal summarily with two of his former employees charged with fraud; and why he instructed this course.

Mr. Hobson

My right hon. Friend has considered the observations which the learned Judge is reported to have made. The Post Office takes a very serious view of offences committed by its servants and it does not hesitate to prosecute an offender. It has been for very many years the practice of the Post Office to press in some cases for committal for trial and in others, where the circumstances seem to warrant that course, to make it clear to the local justices that the Department is prepared to accept the jurisdiction conferred on them by the Criminal Justice Act of 1925, if in their opinion the cases are proper to be dealt with by them. The decision, of course, rests with the magistrates. Publicity follows automatically whether the case be dealt with summarily or committal for trial sought. The present practice has not given rise to any serious difficulty in the past and there has never been at any time any question of the Department instructing its legal representatives to press for the summary treatment of a case. In order to avoid misunderstanding in the future, however, my right hon. Friend has issued instructions as to the precise way in which the Department's willingness to assent to summary treatment is to be expressed if, in the magistrates' view, such treatment would be appropriate.