§ MR. BIGGARrose to call the attention of the House to the criticisms of Dr. H. Quin on the conduct of the noble Lord the Member for County Down, with Minutes of the Council of the Ulster Home Government Association. The hon. Member said, that personally he did not think this matter was one of very great importance; but as it had given rise to a good deal of discussion in the public papers, he had thought it his duty to bring the subject before the House and before the noble Lord whose conduct was impugned. On reading the report of the speech which the noble 30 Lord made on a previous occasion, he (Mr. Biggar) wrote to parties in Belfast whom he thought might possibly know something of the facts of the case. He did not bring the matter forward in the slightest degree in the interests of either the Whig or the Tory Party; but simply to give the noble Lord an opportunity of setting himself right with the House, if he wished to do so. The noble Lord was reported to have said that he was never asked any questions on the subject of Home Rule in the County Down. He did not wish to bring any serious charge of want of accuracy against the noble Lord, because he was disposed to make allowance for a lapse of memory; or that, perhaps, in the excitement of a political contest, he might not have remembered all that took place. He could imagine that was so; and if it was, it should be a caution to gentlemen who cross-examined candidates at elections to have their communications in writing. The statement of the noble Lord was very explicit; but the statement of his (Mr. Biggar's) friend in Belfast, who was the hon. Secretary of the Home Government Association, was also equally explicit. Dr. Quin was a gentleman of high character, and his word was to be believed, and he was convinced the statement he was about to read to the House was thoroughly correct, although he repeated that he was not disposed to say that the noble Lord had been intentionally incorrect in his denial. In addition to the letter of Dr. Quin which he had received, there was the additional corroboration of members of the Association, which were taken immediately after the event had occurred; and, after reading these statements, he thought the House would arrive at the conclusion that the noble Lord really did pledge himself to abstain from voting on the question of Home Rule. Now, the words reported to have been used by the noble Lord in this House were that he had had no communication with the Home Rulers, and that he was never asked any questions on the subject of Home Rule in the County Down. Dr. Quin stated that he and a number of the Ulster Home Government Association were appointed a deputation to visit the candidates. Mr. Andrews, the Whig candidate, informed the deputation that he would vote against Home Rule, against University 31 Catholic Education, and against Mr. Butt's Land Bill. With regard to the noble Lord, Dr. Quin said that on the 10th of May, 1878, the deputation heard him address the electors in the Court House at Bangor. As soon as he came out of the Court House, the deputation addressed his Lordship in the street, and told him that they had been appointed by the Ulster Home Government Association to wait on the rival candidates for County Down, and ask them to abstain from voting on the Home Rule question, and his Lordship replied—"I will abstain." Dr. Quin thought he added—"Upon my honour I will abstain;" but was not quite certain about those words. He was, however, certain that his Lordship said point blank—"I will abstain." Dr. Quin thereupon observed—"You can easily abstain. Keep away hunting or shooting, and nobody will be any the wiser." The noble Lord again reiterated his neutral pledge. He (Mr. Biggar) had a letter from the Rev. Father Cahill, another member of the deputation, in which the reverend gentleman said, that the exigencies of Party must, indeed, be terrible to produce such havoc in the noble Lord's memory. Father Cahill's narrative was to the effect that he and Dr. Quin were appointed as a deputation to wait on Lord Castlereagh and Mr. Andrews with respect to the restoration of the Irish Parliament and Catholic Education. The Minute Book stated that on the 22nd of May an adjourned meeting of the Council was held, when the deputation were asked to give a verbatim report of the interview. Father Cahill said—
I introduced the deputation from this Council to the noble Lord. I then said—'If elected, will you oppose the Catholic Education Bill, or be neutral on that question?' He said—'I will be neutral on that question.' Dr. Quin then said—'If elected, will you oppose Home Rule, or consent to be neutral on the question?' Lord Castlereagh Baid—'I will be neutral.'Now, in bringing this matter before the House, he had not attempted to push the case too much against the noble Lord; but he thought he had given sufficient evidence to show that the observations of the noble Lord, when the subject was before the House the other evening, were not a true statement of the facts; and, therefore, he hoped the noble Lord would say that the report was incorrect through the neglect of the reporters, or 32 that his memory had been defective in regard to what really took place.
§ VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGHSir, the House may remember that a short time ago I ventured to offer a few words of explanation in regard to certain remarks made by the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition concerning myself. Last Friday week, Sir, I received a letter from the hon. Member for Cavan, in which he informed me that he had received such a letter from a Dr. Quin, of Belfast, as justified him in contradicting the statement which I had made in the House. After receiving that letter I immediately communicated with my friends in the County Down in order to verify my recollection; and I am glad to say that the result of these inquiries is that I now strictly adhere to the statement I previously made. I find, on inquiry, that an interview did take place between Dr. Quin and myself; but as I did not know Dr. Quin, either by sight or by name, it is rather hard for me to be expected to remember that I met him among the very great number of people I met during the course of my candidature. I can assure the House that when I met Dr. Quin I had not the slightest idea that he came to me on behalf of the Ulster Home Rule Association. When he came to me I had just been addressing a great meeting in the town of Bangor, and I was accosted by two gentlemen in the public street. The interview took place in the presence of upwards of 100 people, many of whom are influential electors of the County Down, and there happened to be present the then Grand Master of the Orange Lodge of Belfast. During this interview not a word was said to lead me to suppose that those two gentlemen in any way represented the Home Rule Association; and hence I think I was perfectly justified in stating to the House that I had received no deputation from the Home Rule Association. I again distinctly state that during this interview I gave no promise, directly or indirectly, with regard to Home Rule. This statement is borne out by letters which I hold in my hand, and which were written by gentlemen who were present at the interview, and by others who were standing by; and, if necessary, I could bring forward evidence to fully endorse all I have said. On an ordinary occasion, Sir, I should con- 33 sider that I had already said quite sufficient; but, with the permission of the House, I shall venture to read an extract from an article that appeared in one of the most influential and most ably-conducted newspapers in the Province of Ulster. I venture to think that, after I have read it, the House will agree with me that there is no further need to prolong this discussion. The paper I refer to is The Ulster Examiner, which is the leading organ of the Home Rule Party in the North of Ireland, and the number from which I shall quote is dated 20th July, 1878, which the House will observe was only two months after the election. The extract is as follows:—
Our Gladstonian contemporaries are anxious to know what promises Lord Castlereagh gave to his Catholic supporters during the recent contest. We should be something like an authority upon this matter, and we will answer the question by stating that Lord Castlereagh gave no promise to vote for Home Rule. The alleged confederation between him and the Home Rulers is quite a myth. We trust our very Liberal contemporaries will be satisfied with this very Liberal announcement. The Home Rule pledge which our contemporaries allude to exists only in their imagination. It was never given by Lord Castlereagh; but other concessions were made by him. He pledged himself to support the education policy of the Government, and to stand by Lord Beaconsfield tooth and nail, and once for all allay the heartburnings of the Irish people. If the organ of the Corn Exchange wishes to know whether Lord Castlereagh pledged himself to the Home Rulers—well, we candidly answer, "He did not.'
MR. SULLIVANremarked, that the late Protestant Archbishop of Dublin, Dr. Whately, wrote an amusing little work, entitled Historic Doubt concerning the Existence of Napoleon Bonaparte. By a process similar to that which had been seen in the House to-night, the Archbishop showed that there were very contradictory statements as to anything which Napoleon had said or done, or whether he ever existed. The statements of the two gentlemen who had been quoted would be believed in Ulster as readily as, he would not say any more readily than, the statement of the noble Lord. They had the testimony of these two gentlemen declaring positively to an interview in the streets of Bangor; whereas the noble Lord declared that nothing of the kind occurred. ["No!"] At all events, the noble Lord denied what was alleged to have passed on the 34 occasion. If the matter rested there, there might be some doubt; but it was a most remarkable fact that when the noble Lord needed the aid in the County Down of the Home Rulers, his agent purchased 500 copies of a newspaper which contained a resolution stating that the noble Lord had given satisfactory pledges to the Home Rulers. Hon. Gentlemen opposite very intelligently drew a wide distinction between promising to vote for Home Rule and promising to be neutral; but they were quite unable to draw a distinction at Liverpool between voting for an inquiry and voting for Home Rule. This was so much of a personal matter that he (Mr. Sullivan) did not wish to go on with it. It simply meant this—that in future the Irish electors ought to be very careful as to the pledges they received from candidates standing for different constituencies, and also the pledges so readily given by their agents. It was very painful for Gentlemen to be bandying statements which were contradicted on the floor of that House. He knew that Conservative Gentlemen would not be likely to hold communications henceforth with Homo Rulers, because the period had passed for the present when they thought they might secure the Home Rule vote; and as grapes were sour when they could not be reached, there was no doubt that for some time to come they would hear no more of Conservative coquettings with Home Rule.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONSir, as the involuntary cause of the trouble which has been given to the noble Lord, I desire to say one or two words as to the course I have taken in the matter. All I said, in referring to the subject a few days ago, was that there appeared to be some doubt as to the precise position of the noble Lord with regard to the Home Rule question, and, perhaps, I may be allowed to say a word in justification of the course I have taken. The House will recollect that what I said was that there appeared to be, or that I understood there was, some doubt as to the position the noble Lord held with regard to the Home Rule question, and that we ought to have the doubt cleared up. What has passed shows I was entirely justified in the statement which I made. The noble Lord has just made a statement which I accept, and which I am sure the whole House will accept, as 35 absolutely correct. At the same time, that does not in the least alter the fact that there does appear to have existed at the time of the election, and, indeed, up to the present moment, a great misapprehension in the County Down as to the position which the noble Lord held with regard to the Home Rule question. I must say that the deputation from the Home Rule Association took an extremely inconvenient mode of ascertaining his opinion. I am not in the least surprised that misapprehension should have arisen as to what occurred at an interview of that kind, and I entirely accept the noble Lord's statement with regard to it. Still I cannot acquit the noble Lord's supporters and friends of having taken advantage of what was evidently a total misapprehension for the purpose of promoting the noble Lord's election. It appears that a resolution was passed by the Home Rule League, in which they stated that the assurances received from the noble Lord were satisfactory. No doubt, that resolution did not come under the personal observation of the noble Lord, but it must have come under the observation of many of his supporters; and it was not fair that up to this time no steps were taken to correct an entirely erroneous statement, on the strength and presumed accuracy of which the noble Lord received the support of the Association, which was given under a total misapprehension of what the noble Lord had said upon the question. I am sorry that the House has been troubled with personal explanations of this character, and I am sorry that the noble Lord has been called upon to explain the exact position of affairs; but, at the same time, I cannot say that I can take the smallest blame to myself in the matter, because it was most desirable that a misapprehension so long existing should now at last be finally cleared up.
§ MR. SPEAKERThe Motion before the House is the Motion to go into Committee of Supply. On a Motion of that character considerable latitude is usually allowed by the House; and the hon. Member for Cavan has been permitted to bring forward what he considers a grievance before the House goes into Committee of Supply. The House has also heard on a personal matter the noble Lord the Member for the County Down. I am bound to say, however, that if de- 36 bates are to arise on personal matters of this character, such a course will lead to grave inconvenience.
§ Mr. PEASEsaid, that after what had fallen from the Speaker he desired to say only one word. He had had the honour of contesting an election with the noble Lord the Member for the County Down as his opponent. Party spirit then ran high, but he could state that the noble Lord never twisted one word of his or of his Colleagues; nor did the noble Lord deviate one iota, in order to gain that election, from the course of an honourable and an upright man. He could believe that Party spirit ran even higher in Ireland; but he could not believe, from the character of the noble Lord and his family in the county which he had the honour to represent, that the noble Lord would wilfully mislead the House, either as regarded half a promise or a whole promise.
§ SIR THOMAS BATESONSir, I was in the County Down and knew a good deal about the elections of 1878. I am prepared to assert, and I have letters to prove, that the noble Lord neither directly nor indirectly either promised to be neutral or to abstain from voting on the question of Home Rule. That question was never put to him. The gentleman who accompanied Dr. Quin who has been mentioned has, on paper and in print, declared emphatically that the question never was put, and I think the noble Lord has amply vindicated his position. I hold in my hand a manifesto issued by the Home Rule Association at the election, in which Home Rule never was mentioned; nor, indeed, was it mentioned during the canvass of either of the candidates. I admit that a large number of the respectable Roman Catholics supported the noble Lord in that election, and perhaps hon. Gentlemen opposite would like to know the reason why? I will tell them the reason. It was because the respectable Roman Catholics of the County Down have learned to distrust, to suspect, and to dislike the Whigs, Whiggery, and Whig nominees, that they supported the noble Lord. And further, they held this language—
We, the Roman Catholics of the County Down, have hitherto been made hewers of wood and drawers of water for the democratic Presbyterians, and, therefore, we will support the son of one of the best landlords in Ireland.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERI earnestly hope the House will bear in mind the few words which you, Sir, addressed to it a short time ago. We are perfectly well aware that there is nothing the House holds so dear as the honour of its Members; and, therefore, at whatever risk or inconvenience to our debates, we are always ready to give a hearing to those who wish to speak upon personal conduct. I have no doubt that the hon. Member for Cavan brought forward this question in order to clear up a matter on which he thought there was something to be said; and I am sure everyone who listened, to my noble Friend's answer was thoroughly satisfied—["No, no!"]—was thoroughly satisfied with the noble, straightforward, and frank manner in which he answered the questions put to him. ["No, no!"] I am extremely sorry if anybody can form a different impression from that which it has made upon me, and I believe upon the House generally. However, after these explanations have been given, and now that we have been informed by the noble Lord of what occurred, the time has, in my opinion, come for the matter to be allowed to drop. It was natural that the noble Lord opposite (the Marquess of Hartington) should have made the remarks he did in reference to what passed on a previous occasion; but I do think we should be committing a serious error if we allowed ourselves to be drawn into a discussion with respect to the politics of any particular part of the United Kingdom, or, indeed, of any matter further touching the question now before the House. I am sure there will be a general opinion that the noble Lord has acted Straightforwardly. ["No, no!"] Well, that will be the opinion of all who have listened candidly to what the noble Lord said. I hope your advice, Sir, will be taken, and that we may now be allowed to proceed with the Business of the evening.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, he was sorry to intrude upon the House in connection with the present personal discussion, and he would not have done so but for the unfortunate remarks of the hon. Baronet the Member for Devizes (Sir Thomas Bateson). He was not surprised that the hon. Baronet should have made an attack upon the Whig Party, seeing that he had been expelled by them from 38 his seat in Ireland on a former occasion. The hon. Baronet had said that he knew everything that had happened at the County Down election. Well, at the present moment a matter of great interest was under discussion in the North of Ireland, and that was a statement by Mr. Finigan, who was present at this interview between the noble Lord and the deputation from the Home Rulers, that he had discovered the secret of how everyone had voted, notwithstanding the secrecy of the Ballot. But the hon. Baronet had said emphatically that there was not one word mentioned about Home Rule during the entire canvass of either of the candidates. In regard to this matter, the honour of the noble Lord was not alone at stake. The honour and political character of the Rev. Mr. Cahill, the recognized manager and editor of The Ulster Examiner, was also at stake, and that of the Secretary of the Home Rule Association of Ulster. He (Mr. Callan) had had some slight part in this matter, and he gave a hearty and thorough support to the candidature of the noble Lord for the County Down. He did so because of the express statement of the Home Rule Association, that the noble Lord had satisfied them upon one point; and they should recollect that what had occurred in the House in connection with this matter bore that statement out. The noble Lord had carefully avoided, on the present occasion, to reiterate or re-affirm the declaration which he made on the last occasion. The noble Lord then said he was asked no question on the subject of Home Rule in the county of Down. He had carefully avoided reaffirming that statement that day. He had again denied that he made any pledge whatever to support Home Rule; but that was not the charge that was made. The charge which was made, and which had not been denied, was that he gave a distinct pledge of neutrality on two points—namely, upon Catholic University Education and Home Rule. He was not at all surprised at the misapprehension and mystification which existed as to what pledge the noble Lord gave; for they knew that similar mystification existed as to the intrigue which was carried, and the pledge which was made, on behalf of the Whig Party at the Sheffield election.
§ MR. FINIGANThe question rests not on an alleged promise of the noble Lord to vote for Home Rule, but on his promise not to vote against it. I find in The Morning News, a Presbyterian organ of Ulster, this statement published on the 22nd of May, 1878—
The support of the Home Rulers was deliberately bargained for by Lord Castlereagh, and was purchased by a promise given by him not to vote against Home Rule.I am not surprised that the noble Lord should now deny in public what he secretly promised. I expected nothing else from the collateral descendant of the infamous Castlereagh of Union times. ["Oh, oh!"] I did not, and could not, expect anything else from the descendant of one of such infamous notoriety. ["Oh, oh!" "Order!"]