§ 23. Mr. BECKETTasked the Home Secretary whether he has received any communications asking for the release of Francis Breen, J. Gavin, Bernard Jago, 580 and J. Foley; if so, from whom were these requests; and what answer he has returned?
§ Mr. CLYNESSince the hon. Member asked a similar question in March last, representations on behalf of the men named have been addressed to the Home Office by six organisations and by six individuals. I will circulate the names in the OFFICIAL REPORT. Replies sent were to the effect that I had not been able to find in the representations submitted to me any grounds which would justify me in recommending any interference with the sentences imposed.
§ Mr. BECKETTI apologise, but I did not hear the right hon. Gentleman's reply. May I ask whether he has replied to Question 22 about allowing visits to these prisoners?
§ Mr. CLYNESThe answer I have just given is to Question 22.
§ Mr. BECKETTIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that these men have no relatives in this country, and, therefore, may I ask his grounds for refusing permission for visits?
§ Mr. CLYNESI think the hon. Member is under a misunderstanding. I have yet to answer that point on a question to be submitted to me.
§ Mr. BECKETTI must apologise, but I think there is a misunderstanding. The right hon. Gentleman has replied to the wrong question, and I am asking a supplementary on Question No. 22.
§ Mr. CLYNESI understand that Question 23 deals with the subject of visits.
§ Mr. BECKETTNo. Question No. 22, asks why they have been refused permission to receive visits. It is:
To ask the Home Secretary whether he has received any requests for permission to visit J. Gavin, Francis Breen, Bernard Jago, and J. Foley and what answer was returned?
§ Mr. CLYNESThese prisoners are allowed to receive visits under the prison rules on the same conditions as other convicts and for this purpose application to me is not necessary. A special application made to me for permission to visit Breen and another for permission to visit the other three convicts were refused on the ground that she applications 581 did not come within the purposes for which visits can properly be allowed.
§ Mr. BECKETTCan my right hon. Friend say whether he has received an application from Mr. H. P. O'Brien to visit these prisoners and, as they have no relatives in England who answer to the necessary regulations, cannot he stretch his powers in this matter and allow the visits?
§ Mr. CLYNESI cannot give the particulars for which the hon. Member asks, but I can assure him that any applications to visit prisoners having a domestic basis or other proper grounds, will he favourably considered.
§ Mr. BECKETTArising out of that reply —
§ Mr. SPEAKERWe cannot spend the whole afternoon on these questions.
§ Mr. BECKETTOn a point of Order. Question 22 was answered wrongly, and I have had no chance of putting a supplementary on Question 23.
§ Mr. STEPHENI want to ask a supplementary on Question 23, and so far we have had no answer to that question.
§ Mr. BECKETTOn a point of Order. This is a very important matter. I was given a wrong answer by a quite understandable mistake on the part of the right hon. Gentleman which prevented my raising the matter on Question 23. I think it is rather unkind.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary answered the questions in the wrong order. The hon. Member must remember that there are 129 questions on the Paper, and he cannot have more than a fair share of the time.
§ Mr. BECKETTOn that point of Order. I did not put down all the other questions, and I have had no chance of putting a supplementary question on the question which I have put down.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member seems to think that every question requires a supplementary question.
§ Mr. BECKETTThis one does.
§ Mr. SPEAKERA supplementary question should only occasionally be put in order to elucidate the answer.
§ Following are the names:
§ Nelson Irish Self Determination League—June, 1929.
§ "Women Prisoners' Defence League, Dublin—June, 1929.
§ Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (Irish Section) —June, 1929.
§ National Conference of Irish Labour Defence League—July, 1929.
§ Mrs. Despard—July, 1929.
§ Roger Casement Sinn Fein Club— July, 1929.
§ Ether Bell Robinson (South Africa) —July, 1929.
§ National Amalgamated Furnishing Trades Association—July, 1929.
§ Madame Maud G. MacBride— August, 1929.
§ Mr. John Beckett, M.P.—August, 1929.
§ Mr. Ernest Thurtle, M.P.—October,1929.
§ Adjutant-General, Irish Republican Army—January, 1930.
§ 28. Mr. KINLEYasked the Home Secretary whether there are still Irish political prisoners in English gaols; the nature of the charges against them; the dates and length of sentences; and whether it is the intention of the Government to consider the early liberation of these political offenders?
§ Mr. CLYNESEarly in 1922 an amnesty was granted to all prisoners in custody for offences attributable to Irish political motives and committed in this country before 6th December, 1921, the date of the Irish Treaty. That amnesty was liberally interpreted, and there is now no one in custody for an offence of that type committed before 1922. Of persons convicted subsequently, there are only four now in prison in regard to whom anyone has represented to me that their offences were of an Irish political character. These four men are John Foley, Bartley Iago, Patrick Joseph Gavin and Francis Breen, who are now serving sentences of penal servitude for offences committed on 18th July, 1922. They were all concerned in an armed raid on a bank at Prestwich. Foley and Iago were convicted on 20th November, 1922, of armed robbery and felonious shooting, and were sen- 583 tenced in all to 10 years penal servitude. Gavin was convicted on 13th July, 1925, of robbery with violence, stealing and possessing firearms and explosives with intent to endanger life, and sentenced in all to 10 years' penal servitude. Breen was convicted on 30th June, 1923, of armed robbery, shooting with intent to murder and to cause grievous bodily harm and to resist arrest, larceny, and felonious possession of firearms and ammunition, and sentenced to penal servitude for life.
The offences committed by these men did not come within the term" of the amnesty. An earlier offence committed by one of them did come within it. Breen had previously been convicted, on 4th July, 1921, of being in possession of explosives and arms, and had received a sentence of five years' penal servitude, the remainder of which was remitted in February, 1922, as a result of the amnesty. In reply to the last part of the question, I am afraid I can add nothing to previous answers.
§ Mr. KINLEYIn view of the fact that these men were actuated by political motives—[Interruption]—and that they were in fact engaged in fighting for the freedom of their country [Interruption.]
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member must not put a question like that as a supplementary question.
§ Mr. KINLEYIn view of the strong feeling here, will my right hon. Friend receive a deputation of members of his own party who are interested in this question?
§ Mr. CLYNESI appreciate the feeling with which my hon. Friend has addressed himself to this subject, and I regret that I have been compelled by the terms of the question to give the answer that I have given, and for the present I can add nothing to it.
§ Mr. BECKETTArising from that reply —
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe Home Secretary has said that he can add nothing to his reply. Nothing can arise out of nothing.
§ Mr. BECKETTOn a point of Order. Without identifying myself with what you have said about the Home Secretary, may I ask, in view of the fact that we 584 have had only one supplementary question on this important question, and that the last question on the subject was burked through a misunderstanding, that we may raise one further important matter? I think we ought to have a chance of raising it.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI cannot allow any more supplementaries on this question.