When two Government minister in the department responsible for enforcing World War I's crucial lighting laws were convicted in 1916 on a breach of the regulations aimed at protecting the country from German airship raids, the public probably expected them to pay heavily for their misdemeanours.
But when it emerged that the culprits had been fined "paltry" sums of £1 and five shillings respectively (equivalent to £82 and £20.67 today, according to the inflation calculator) there was a political uproar centred on the Scottish Borders town of Jedburgh.
A handful of Jedburgh residents, all of them said to be from much poorer families than the highfalutin politicians,, had been absolutely hammered by the local judge at Jedburgh Sheriff Court who imposed fines ranging from £7.10s (£619) to £15 (£1,239). The total in financial penalties added up to £57.10s (£4,753), way above the fines handed down in other parts of the country. And failure to pay would mean a spell in jail.
There was outrage in the town at the scale of the punishments meted out by Sheriff-Substitute Ronald Baillie. A public meeting was convened at which citizens had their say, and a petition was sent to the Secretary of State for Scotland Thomas McKinnon Wood requesting him to use his powers to mitigate the penalties. He refused.
In a previous article we told how Sir John Jardine, the Liberal MP for Roxburghshire, had attacked his own Government's policy of allowing young boys to be birched for trivial offences such as poaching rabbits or trout from the estates of the local gentry.
Sir John's intervention in the case of the "Jedburgh Birchings" was made in 1909. But he was even more forthright in his criticism of the lighting regulation fines of 1916. He raised the issue in the House of Commons several times, and the strength of feeling sparked a full-blown debate. Those Jedburgh fines were to be condemned as wicked, monstrous and 'a scandalous case of inequality'.
The regulations, imposed on the outbreak of war, required every household and place of business to ensure no internal light on their premises could be seen outside. It meant blinds had to be drawn at all times during the hours of darkness.
The threat of Zeppelin raids particularly on east coast towns was considerable, and yet the rules were to be breached on many occasions in all parts of the country, sometimes due to carelessness or negligence, at other times when people simply forgot to pull their curtains before receiving a visit from the local constabulary.
Prosecutions generally resulted in fairly modest fines in the range two shillings to one pound. But Sheriff-Substitute Baillie, in the beginning at least, had different ideas on how to chastise those who failed to stick to the regulations. However, soon after his 'monstrous' fines on the little people of Jedburgh it is reported he fined the next offender just fifteen shillings.
Sir John first raised the issue of the harsh financial penalties imposed on his constituents during a Commons sitting in May 2016. He told the House that on or about the 13th April Mr. David Cockburn was fined £15, Mr. Mathew Carstairs Noble £7 10s., Mrs. Noble, his wife, also £7 10s., Mr. George Steel Forbes £10, Mr. George Beveridge £10, and Mr. James Hunter £7 10s.
He asked Mr McKinnon Wood to investigate all of the circumstances "with a view to considering whether the prerogative of mercy of the Crown should graciously be exercised as regards the amounts of fines,"
But the Secretary of State was completely unmoved, replying: "I know of no reasons why I should intervene. It is of great importance that the Regulations should be strictly observed."
James Hogge, Liberal MP for Edinburgh East was scathing in his criticism of the treatment handed down in Jedburgh's court. He said: "The fines mentioned amounted to £57 10s., and were imposed on a rural town in a rural part of Scotland far removed from the sea. The fines in similar cases elsewhere have rightly or wrongly only ranged from 15s. to 30s. Will the right hon. Gentleman, in view of the status of these people, see that while they are adequately fined there is some remission made?"
He may have been a member of the same political party as Sir John Jardine and Mr Hogge, but Mr McKinnon Wood was not for turning. He told them: "I cannot promise to make any remission. The Sheriff is perfectly competent to judge as to the proper fine to be imposed. I do not think that the point that this is an inland town is one which would lend much comfort to the inhabitants, as we have had Zeppelin raids over inland towns more than once recently."
Despite his lack of success, Sir John would raise the Jedburgh cases again three months later with a new Scottish Secretary (Jack Tennant) in office. Sir John had discovered that Mr Noble, fined £7.10s by Sheriff Baillie, had not even been at home when his wife committed the offence "through negligence while spring cleaning". Yet both parties had been fined.
Exorbitant and extraordinary fines had been denounced as far back as the Declaration of the Estates of the Kingdom of Scotland of 1689, so would Mr Tennant ascertain whether the Jedburgh fines should be reduced, asked Sir John.
Mr. Tennant: "Full inquiry was made into these cases by my right hon. Friend who preceded me as Secretary for Scotland, with the result that he found no reason for his interference, and I do not propose to reopen them."
A separate question the following day about Mr Cockburn's £15 fine received equally short shrift from the Minister.
It was at this point that the incredible disclosures about the fines 'suffered' by the Government's own Ministers for breaching the regulations came to light.
William Pringle, Liberal member for North West Lanarkshire said: "Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Attorney-General was only fined £1, while this poor man was fined £15?
And an English MP told the Commons that in England and Wales prosecutions were undertaken by the Home Office, and the Under-Secretary for the Home Department had recently been fined only 5s. for an offence such as this.
This prompted Mr Hogge to ask: "Why is it that the Attorney-General is fined £1, and the Under-Secretary to the Home Office 5s., while this man in Jedburgh is fined £15?
However, according to Mr Tennant the matter was entirely at the discretion of the courts.
TO BE CONTINUED.....
NEXT: MPs ATTACK SCOTTISH SECRETARY FOR 'LACK OF MERCY'
No comments:
Post a Comment