HC Deb 01 August 1871 vol 208 cc654-6
COLONEL GILPIN

regretted he did not see the Home Secretary in his place; but after the Notice he had given he thought that in common courtesy the right hon. Gentleman should have been present. In his absence, however, he must ask the question of the First Lord of the Treasury, By whose sanction the meeting in Trafalgar Square took place, after it had been forbidden by the Chief Commissioner of Police; and if he considers it in accordance with law that a public meeting should be held within half a mile of the House of Commons for the purpose of discussing a question that was then occupying the attention of that House?

MR. GLADSTONE

Sir, I really think that I need not vindicate my right hon. Friend from any want of courtesy. I do not suppose that the hon. and gallant Gentleman himself believes my right hon. Friend capable of discourtesy to himself or to any other Members of the House. My right hon. Friend has been labouring lately under very severe indisposition. I hope he is quite sufficiently recovered to attend the House, and that only accidentally he has not been able to commence business quite so early as he usually does, though much earlier than almost any other person I know. But, though I do not excuse him, I must excuse myself, because I have no documents in my possession; and having expected that my right hon. Friend would be here to answer the Question, I must request the hon. and gallant Gentleman to receive my answer with some indulgence as to minute particulars.

MR. BRUCE

I am sorry, Sir, I was not in my place when the hon. and gallant Gentleman put his Question. My hon. and gallant Friend asks by whose sanction the meeting in Trafalgar Square took place. He must be aware that all meetings are either legal or illegal. If they are legal they require no sanction on the part of the Government, and if they are illegal Government cannot sanction their being held. Late on Sunday evening I received notice that the meeting which was to be held in Hyde Park was to be adjourned to Trafalgar Square, for the purpose of petitioning Parliament against the grant to Prince Arthur. It became my duty to communicate immediately with the promoters of the meeting, and to inform them that any meeting held for the purpose of petitioning Parliament, consisting of more than 50 persons and within a mile of the Houses of Parliament was unlawful, and could not be permitted. That communication was made, and in the course of the communication I was assured that the object of the promoters was not to meet for the purpose of petitioning Parliament; in fact, they issued a notice calling the meeting for other purposes—that is, for the purpose of considering questions connected with the annuity to Prince Arthur. It was clear that under these circumstances the meeting was not an illegal one. Meetings for other purposes than that of petitioning Parliament may be held in Trafalgar Square or anywhere else without those who take part in them being subject to prosecution or the meetings being illegal. The only illegality which can possibly arise would not be one which would justify the interference of Government, and that is a meeting which might cause obstruction to public traffic. If any obstruction arises, the person causing it may be summoned for the offence, but the obstruction would not in itself constitute an unlawful meeting.

COLONEL GILPIN

asked if it was legal at such a meeting to discuss any measures pari passu with the Houses of Parliament; why measures had been taken to greatly increase the police force in the neighbourhood of the Houses, and why the troops had been ordered to remain in their barracks?

MR. BRUCE

It was quite impossible at one time of the day to know what was the object of the meeting. If called to petition Parliament it would clearly have been an illegal meeting, and it was most important, if it was an illegal meeting, that the soldiers, who were constantly in that neighbourhood, should not take part in it. The Horse Guards had, therefore, issued an order to prevent the attendance of soldiers. The illegality had reference entirely to the object of the meeting—to petition Parliament.

MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE

wished to have it distinctly understood whether meetings, if not intended to present a Petition to Parliament, at any hour of the day or night, might be called in any public square or place within one mile of the Houses of Parliament, whatever obstruction might thereby be caused to the public traffic. Did not the right hon. Gentleman think it essential that the Government should introduce a Bill to remedy this extraordinary state of things?

MR. BRUCE

I have already stated that there is no power to prevent any public meeting unless convened within the distance named for the purpose of petitioning Parliament, which has been by statute declared to be illegal, or in case of a declaration made upon oath that a breach of the peace is apprehended.