What happened was that Mr. Christmas Humphreys said that she got excited and hysterical. Her counsel said that substantially speaking, he did not commit himself to every detail, but he did not fundamentally or substantially dispute the statement of Mr. Christmas Humphreys. The lady was indignant at the sight of a soldier in uniform being taken away in that way. That is according to the summary which I have. What happened is pretty clear. She got indignant, she became excited, and there it is. She then asked the crowd for names of witnesses, and she addressed the crowd. I am told she talked to them in an excited way and that this went on for a quarter of an hour. [Interruption.] I am sorry but the Noble Lord ought to be fair. I had eight minutes, and I have now only half a minute. She got excited, and she caused the crowd to increase—so it was held by the police, but that charge was not proceeded with. There was a quarter of an hour during which a police officer asked her if she would be good enough to move on, because she was causing trouble and obstruction. In the end, she would not go, and he warned her that he would have to arrest her. She was treated with every courtesy and consideration at the station in circumstances of considerable provocation to the police. If there was delay at the station, I do not believe it was caused by the police; I think it was caused by the lady and her arguments in her excited condition.

That is all there is to it, as far as I can tell, and I really think the noble Lord is making a mountain out of a molehill. I would only add this, that if he and the hon. Gentleman would like to see the Commissioner of Police, I should be very glad to arrange a meeting, and I hope and think that the Commissioner of Police will be able to satisfy them, as I indeed feel satisfied, that there is no grave charge which can be substantiated against the police. They will, however, form their own view. I really do not think the case is worthy of an elaborate inquiry.