HC Deb 07 March 1889 vol 333 cc1124-5
MR. THEOBALD, (Essex, Romford)

asked the Secretary of State for War if, on Sunday last, in the Roman Catholic Church at Clonmel, the officiating priest, Father Byrne, from the altar commanded the soldiers to remain in their seats consequent on their having received orders from Lieutenant Geoghegan to leave the building, thus commanding them by priestly influence to disobey the orders of their commanding officer; and also that, before the officer left the church, the priest publicly rebuked the said officer; and if Lieutenant Geoghegan has in consequence been placed under arrest?

MR. W. MACDONALD (Queen's County, Ossory)

I rise to a point of order. I want to know whether, having regard to the strict censorship exercised in respect of Questions put by hon. Members on this side of the House, a Question ought to be allowed to appear on the paper which is neither grammatical nor intelligible?

* MR. SPEAKER

If the hon. Member insinuates that partiality is shown as between one side and the other in regard to Questions he is entirely wrong, and there is no justification for such an insinuation. I am not aware of any difference being made, and I have not thought it necessary to exercise any censorship in regard to this particular question.

MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)

On the same subject I wish to ask the Secretary of State for War, if he will communicate to the House the Report of the Commander-in-Chief in Ireland on the conduct of Lieutenant Geoghegan in a Catholic Church in Clonmel, on Sunday last, and state what has been the result?

* MR. E. STANHOPE

The principle which has hitherto been acted upon in such matters was stated by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Edinburgh, as follows, on March 29, 1881— There is no printed regulation on the subject, but it is manifest that officers in command of soldiers at church or chapel must be allowed to exercise some discretion as to permitting them to remain there when language is used in sermons to which soldiers would not be allowed to listen if spoken in public meeting. I entirely adopt the principle so laid down. Applying it to the circumstances of the present case, I have read the language addressed to the congregation on the occasion in question in the Lenten Pastoral, and I am of opinion that it held up duly constituted authorities to contempt, and as such ought not to have been addressed to soldiers. The lieutenant in charge, in the exercise of his discretion, ordered the troops to withdraw. He stated further in evidence that in doing so he intended no disrespect either to the Roman Catholic Church or to the officiating priest. I cannot, therefore, condemn the exercise of the discretion vested in this officer.

MR. SEXTON

May I point out to the right hon. Gentleman that he has not answered my Question as to any Report on the subject by the Commander in-Chief in Ireland.

* MR. E. STANHOPE

I thought the hon. Gentleman knew quite well that Reports of this description are quite confidential, and are not communicated to the House.

SIR W. HARCOURT (Derby)

I did not understand the right hon. Gentleman to state the facts of the case.

* MR. E. STANHOPE

That was not the question put to me.

SIR W. HARCOURT

Then I will ask the right hon. Gentleman to state himself what the facts of the case were, because the answer which he has given to us is a sort of argumentative statement upon a state of facts which is not before us. Will the right hon. Gentleman prefer to make a statement now or to-morrow?

* MR. E. STANHOPE

A statement, of facts ought to be made with the utmost care in such a case and I should prefer that notice should be given.

MR. SEXTON

Will the right hon. Gentleman have any objection to lay on the Table a copy of the Lenten Pastoral which he says he has read, and which contains language that justified the order?

* MR. E. STANHOPE

I will consider that question also, and will state to-morrow what course I will take.