MOTION FOR RETURN. (Hansard, 2 September 1886)

EARL DE LA WARE

, said, that, in the absence of any official information relative to the recent riots in Belfast, he wished to ask the Government whether they would give a Return of the number of persons killed and wounded in the serious collisions which had taken place between the people and the police in the streets of that city? A Commission had been appointed to inquire into the subject of these riots; but they knew the time that usually elapsed before any Report of a Commission was placed before Parliament; and he hoped, therefore, that Her Majesty's Government would not find it inconvenient to lay the Return which he asked for upon the Table of the House at an early day. There was naturally a feeling that the use of firearms by the police in the streets of a town was somewhat questionable, and especially when the military were at hand, whose training and discipline rendered them more cool and less liable to momentary irritation. Though he should be most unwilling to make any remark which could be interpreted as casting the slightest censure upon such a body of men as the Irish Constabulary, yet he must add that if the accounts which had appeared in the public Press relative to the collisions which had unhappily occurred between the people and the police in the streets of Belfast were correct, the number of persons who had been killed and wounded was very considerable, and possibly larger than circumstances would seem to justify. Among the statements to which he referred there was one which seemed especially to require notice. It was to the effect that on one occasion during the 1059 riots the Constabulary fired from their barracks in the town indiscriminately upon a crowd in the street, the consequence being that many innocent persons, including women and children, were killed or wounded. There was another statement to which he desired briefly to call attention. It was the Report of Dr. Foy, surgeon of the Whitworth Hospital, Dublin, prepared, as it seemed, for The Medical Press. In this Report it was stated— The gunshot injuries were of two kinds, those produced by bullets, either from rifles or revolvers, and by buckshot. The bullet wounds were of the usual kind, and, in the majority of cases, terminated fatally. There is abundant evidence in the missiles found in the bodies of the unhappy victims to prove that the bullets used were what is known as 'regulation' size. The revolver wounds were, comparatively speaking, few in number, and, as a rule, did not prove fatal. Buckshot was very largely used; and perhaps I can best explain here that, as a missile, it has very little force.… The greater number of the fatal injuries were inflicted on the head and chest. These injuries, in many instances, resulted from buckshot wounds, the pellets finding an entrance into the brain by the eye, or when fired at very close distances possessing sufficient momentum to penetrate the bony wall.… In some cases the shot was fired so close to the person as to penetrate through several folds of clothing. He would not go further into the painful details in this Report, including the deaths of women and children. Among them was one of the mother of several little children standing at the door and lifting a child into the house. The mother was shot dead by a bullet fired from a height. Dr. Foy goes on to say— It is a task of considerable difficulty to form a correct estimate of the number of injuries, as many of the cases went from one practitioner to another.… I have, however, taken pains to analyze all the details supplied to me, and I consider I speak with some accuracy when I give the total number treated as 582, while the number of deaths, as reported by the various gentlemen, may be taken as 34. He felt bound to say that this Report bore upon the face of it the desire to state the truth without bias or prejudice. He had only now to ask Her Majesty's Government, Whether the police in Ireland had a discretionary power of charging their carbines with buckshot instead of ball, and of using their firearms without the previous reading of the Riot Act by a civil magistrate; and, also, whether any officers in command 1060 of troops had lately been invested with the authority of a civil magistrate? Moved, "That there be laid before this House Return of persons killed and wounded in the recent riots at Belfast."— (The Earl De La Warr.)

§ EARL CADOGAN (LORD PRIVY SEAL)

said that, with reference to the first part of the Notice of his noble Friend, he was sorry to say that at present the Government had a Return of 28 deaths as having occurred during the lamentable disturbances at Belfast; but with regard to the list of wounded for which his noble Friend asked, it would be impossible for the Government to provide such a Return. They had at present no means of ascertaining the exact number of wounded who had been admitted to the hospitals at Belfast, or of those who had been treated at their own homes. Under these circumstances, it was impossible that any Return which could be furnished by the Government at present would be in any way reliable. He might, however, remind his noble Friend that a Commission had been issued to inquire into the whole of the circumstances connected with these riots. That Commission suspended its sittings a short time ago; but it had now been strengthened by the addition of a fourth Member, and it was hoped that it would resume its labours before long. When the Commission had reported the Government would be in a better position to ascertain the whole of the facts respecting which his noble Friend asked for information. On the subject of firing upon the people by the police during these riots, he also must plead for some delay before information could be given by the Government. His noble Friend alluded to a Report which he had himself seen, and which had been published in the newspapers, by a private Commission which he understood was sent by the Loyal and Patriotic Union to report on the state of matters in Belfast. Without wishing in any way to impugn the veracity, the bona fides, or the accuracy of the statements contained in that Report, it would, he thought, be understood that it was impossible for the Government to accept statements made by a private Commission of that character in the same unreserved manner in which they would accept those made by the Commission, which, it was hoped, would report before long. The noble Earl 1061 must, therefore, excuse him if he declined to enter into the discussion which he had raised on the question of the firing on the people by the police. One question which the noble Earl had asked he thought he could answer—namely, whether the use of buckshot or bullets was discretionary on the part of the police? The discretion in the matter lay not with the police themselves, but with the officers in command of the police, to whom was intrusted the duty of ordering with what charge the rifles should be fired.