§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol a Question in reference to a speech which he is reported to have made in the East of London last night. He is reported to have used these words—
Our opponents may be loyal subjects of the Queen, but it is difficult for us to understand how that loyalty is compatible with intimate association with men who—as I myself heard the other night in the House of Commons—make it a grievance that Her Majesty's soldiers should beguile a tedious march by singing 'God save the Queen,'I wish, in the first place, to ask whether that is a correct report of his speech?
§ MR. DILLONUnder those circumstances, I must claim the right to address a personal explanation to the House, as I presume the charge is levelled against myself.
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHassented.
§ MR. DILLONI regret to be obliged, Sir, to say that I consider it to be a very gross misrepresentation. I wish to direct the attention of the House to what the nature of the charge is. It is perfectly specific. It charges me with having made it a matter of grievance that the soldiers of the Queen should beguile a tedious march by singing "God save the Queen." What are the circumstances of which I complain? To begin with, there was no tedious march. The soldiers of the Queen were brought into Ennis on the occasion of a Nationalist demonstration of a very advanced character. Into the merits of the demonstration it is not necessary for me to 54 enter. They were brought to the town for the purpose of maintaining the peace of the town if the peace was disturbed; and as usual, upon such occasions, they were confined to the barracks while the demonstration was going on. I now come to what I complain of. The soldiers, instead of being confined to the barrack until the crowds had dispersed after the demonstration was over (as is usual on occasions of the kind) were marched out of the barracks while the streets were thronged by thousands of persons who were returning from the demonstration. They were marched against these thronging thousands, at the imminent danger of a collision; and while the marching was going on they sang "God save the Queen" and "Rule Britannia," and they were headed by the Resident Magistrate, who might have to sit on the Bench as Judge afterwards, who is I am informed, specially appointed to sit and adjudicate in the district. I leave it to this House, and think it is eminently a case for personal explanation, as to whether it is right for a right hon. Gentleman to so outrageously misrepresent the action of a fellow Member of this House for political purposes, and I shall merely conclude by placing the two statements side by side. The statement made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol is that I complained of Her Majesty's soldiers beguiling a weary march by singing "God save the Queen." Well, I complain of four or five things, which I shall now repeat—There was no weary march in the question at all. I complain of the soldiers being turned out of the barracks before the crowd had left the town, which they were doing peaceably. I complain of those soldiers being marched through an excited crowd when there was not a shadow of disturbance, and when they ought to have been kept in barracks; and I complain of their singing songs on that march, a course which was never pursued by soldiers in that district before, although they have been frequently brought in for a similar purpose; and, finally, I complain that a man who might be, if any riot occurred, sitting on the Bench, returning at the head of those soldiers, in the face of the people, singing "Rule Britannia." It is not a question of whether it is a right or wrong. The question is whether the 55 right hon. Gentleman stated what was true or not; and I have now told you what I complained of, and I leave it to the House to judge whether or not that was a fair and honest representation.
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHI will simply say that the hon. Member has not had the courtesy to give me private Notice of his intention to bring this matter forward, and therefore I have not been able to refer to the answer given by my right hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel King-Harman) to the Question asked by the hon. Member the other night. I am, like the hon. Member, quite content to leave the matter to the judgment of the House—who know what the Question and Answer were. It is my impression that the effect of the Question and Answer is precisely what I represented.